Report 2 Rolling Stock - MOUD INDIA

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
REPORT OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE

ON
ROLLING STOCK
FOR
METRO RAILWAYS
NOVEMBER 2013
2
Preface
1. Metro systems are already operational in Delhi and Bangalore and construction
work is progressing at a fast pace in Chennai, Kolkata, Hyderabad, Jaipur,
Kochi and Gurgaon. There are plans to have Metro Systems in cities with
population more than 2 million. MOUD with a view to promote the domestic
manufacturing for Metro Systems and formation of standards for such systems
in India, has constituted a Group for preparing a Base paper on Standardization
and Indigenization of Metro Railway Systems vide Order of F.No.K-
14011/26/2012 MRTS/Coord dated 30 th May 2012.
2. The Group has identified certain issues which require detailed deliberations /
review cost benefit analysis / study. The Group suggested that Sub-Committees
may be constituted consisting of officers/professional drawn from relevant field/
profession from Ministry of Urban Development/Railways/Metros and industries
associated with rail based systems / Metro Railway Systems.
3. Accordingly following Sub-Committees for various systems were constituted by

Ministry of Urban Development vide order No. K-14011/26/2012-MRTS/Coorddt.
30.05.2012/25.07.2012:
Traction system
Rolling stock
Signaling system
Fare collection system
Operation & Maintenance
Track structure
Simulation Tools
4. The Sub-committee on Rolling Stock has following members:

Shri Sanchit Pandey CGM/Rolling Stock/P/DMRC.
Shri Amit Banerjee, GM/Technology Divn. BEML, Bangaluru.
Shri Naresh Aggarwal, Chairman CII, Railway Equipment Divn. & MD & Co-
Chairman, VAE, VKN Industries Pvt. Ltd.
Shri Raminder Singh, Siemens Ltd.
Shri ManjeetNarwan, Resident Vice President, Texmaco Rail &Engg.Ltd.
Shri Samir Nirula, GM, Medha Servo Drives Pvt. Ltd.
Shri Mangal Dev, Director, Alstom Projects India Ltd.
Shri Sriram Raju, Director, Bombardier Transportation India Ltd.
Shri Ajay Sinha, Regional Director, EMD Locomotive Technologies Pvt,.Ltd.
Shri R.Sathish, Director, CII.
3
Dr. A.K. Agarwal, CEO, Autometers Alliance Ltd.
Shri Sajal Gupta, GM/Autometers Alliance Ltd.,
Shri Sanjeev Kumar, Director, GE Transportation (GE India Industrial Pvt. Ltd)
Shri Manoj Kumar, Business Head-Transport Solution, ANSALDO STS
Transportation Systems India Pvt. Ltd.,
Shri D.S.Rajora, Sr. Director, ASSOCHAM
Shri B.UmeshRai, Chief General Manager(Electrical Inspection)/CMRL
Shri S.K. Gupta, US(MRTS-I)/ MoUD
Shri ShalabhTyagi, Director/PE&Metro/RDSO
Shri Anil Kumar, System head/L&T (Hyderabad) Metro rail.
Shri Anil Jangid, Professional
Shri D.D Pahuja, Director(RSE), BMRC.
Shri Jaideep, Director Electrical(G), Railway Board.
5. The details Terms of Reference of the sub-committee on Rolling Stock is given
in Annexure-10 and broadly include formulation of Standards for :
(i) Noise and Vibration level (including RS, Track etc.)
(ii) Emergency evacuation system
(iii) Coupling arrangement (Automatic, semi-automatic etc.)
(iv) Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rate, Power to weight ratio/ % motorization
(v) Eligibility/qualification criteria for procurement
(vi) Propulsion Single source or consortium/JV approach.
(vii) Control & communication protocol common/published standard/standards

for Train Control & Management System (TCMS)
(viii) Driverless Operation
(ix) Indigenization
6. The sub- committee had number of meetings and has since completed the
assigned task. Each issue included in the TOR has been deliberated in detail in
separate chapter in the report. The Key findings are given in Executive
Summary.
4
CONTENTS
Description Page
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9
1.1 Noise and Vibration Level 9
1.2 Emergency Evacuation System 11
1.3 Coupling Arrangement 12
1.4 Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rate/Motorisation 13
1.5 Propulsion-Single source or Consortium/JV approach 15
1.6 Eligibility Criteria 17
1.7 Communication Protocol 18
1.8 Driverless Train Operation 18
1.9 Indigenisation 19
2.0 TERMS OF REFERENCE 21
3.0 NOISE AND VIBRATION LEVEL 23

3.1 Environmental Laws in India and the relevant 23
statutory requirements
3.2 Study of similar international regulations in other 24
countries
having vast knowledge base
3.3 Major Noise sources from Metro systems 26
3.4 Study of Noise assessment inside the Greater Cairo 27
Underground Metro
3.5 A study of Noise Levels associated with New York 28
Citys Mass Transit System
3.6 Noise Levels specified by Various Metros world 31
wideand Indian Metros
3.7 Deliberations on Noise specification for Metros 35
3.8 Vibrations from Metro operations 37
Study of regulations regarding protection of ASI
monuments (heritage structures) from vibration
generated by metro trains operation.Deliberations on
Noise specifications for Metro Rolling Stock
3.9 Deliberations on Vibrations 42
4.0 EMERGENCY EVACUATION SYSTEM 43
4.1 Practices adopted in various metro systems in India 43
and elsewhere along with the underlying
logic/reasons (at least 3 metros each in USA, Europe,
Japan, China and South East Asia to be studied).
4.2 Systems adopted by different Metros in India 46
4.3 Recommendations 47
5.0 Coupling arrangement (Automatic, semi-automatic etc.) 49

5.1 Types of coupler 49
5.2 Functional Requirement of couplers 50
5.3 Recommendations for Coupling Arrangement 51
5
6.0 Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rake, Power to weight 53
ratio/ % motorization
6.1 Percentage Motorisation 53

6.2 Typical Operational parameters for a 6 car rake with 53
50% powering
6.3 Time Saving Calculations 55
6.4 Savings in Regenerative braking 56
6.5 Simulation results by Mitsubishi for KMRCL 750 Volts 57
third rail system with 67% powering
7.0 Propulsion Single source or consortium/JV 61

approach.
7.1 Single source or consortiums/JV of coach 61
manufacturers and Propulsion equipment supplier.
7.2 Views by the Industry representatives 60
7.3 Views of Metros 62
8.0 Eligibility/qualification criteria for procurement 65

8.1 Views of Industry 65
8.2 Views based on experience of Indian Metros 67

8.3 Major Issues 69
8.4 Recommendations of the Committee 70
9.0 Control & communication protocol common/published 73

9.1 TIMS or Train Integrated Management 73
9.3 Views of Metros 74
9.4 Recommendations of the Committee 75
10.0 Driver less control 77

10.1 Driverless Train Operation Main Features 77
10.2 Basic technical system requirements for driverless 77
operation
11.0 Indigenization 79
11.1 Indigenization objectives 79
11.2 Present Scenario 79
11.4 Recommendations of the committee. 83
12.0 Bibliography 85
12.0 Submissions by Metros and Industry
6
12.1 BMRCL Annexure 1
12.2 CMRCL Annexure 2
12.3 DMRC Annexure 3
12.4 LT HMR Annexure 4
12.5 RMGL Annexure 5
12.6 Bombardier Transportation Annexure 6
12.7 BEML Annexure 7
12.8 SIEMENS Annexure 8
12.9 ALSTOM Annexure 9
7
8
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Noise and Oscillation Level

Committee studied following Acts and Legislations:
Environment Protection Act, 1986 and The Noise Pollution (regulation and
Control) Rules, 2000 amended vide Ministry of Environment and Forests
Notification dated 9th March 2009, that stipulate the norms for permissible limits
for noise at various places, alongwith Noise Impact Assessment Significance
criteria.
Permissible Daily Noise exposure levels prescribed by US Environmental

Protection Agency and World Health Organisation(WHO)
The Ancient Monuments and Archaelogical Sites and Remains (Amendment

and Validation) Act 2010. Regulations regarding protection of ASI monuments
(Heritage structures) from vibrations generated by metro train operations.
Committee also considered following studies on Noise and Vibrations emanating from
Metro Systems:
Study of Noise assessment inside the Greater Cairo Underground Metro - By

Mostafa E Aly and Noise
Athens Metro Extension Project to Piraeus Ground borne Noise and Vibration
Assessment and Control
RIVAS Railway Induced Vibration Abatement Solutions Collaborative project

State of the art review of mitigation measures on track Project Coordinator:
Bernd Asmussen International Union of Railways (UIC)
Interim guidelines for Assessment of noise from Tail infrastructure projects-

Published by Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW 5961
Goulburn Street, Sydney
Delhi Metro Report on Train Noise Level Study by Rupert Taylor
Noise impact assessment of mass rapid transit systems in Delhi City Naveen
Garg, Omkar Sharma and S Maji. Acoustics, Ultrasonics, Shock and Vibration
Standard, National Physical Laboratory(CSIR) New Delhi 110012
DMRC Train Noise Level Study RS1 by GC Report dated 7.06.2005
METRO RAILWAY NOISE AND VIBRATION - Causes and solutions for DMRC
Phase III
9
Environmental Noise is recognized as a major Health problem. Noise exposure is a
function of two main factors:
(1) The frequency-weighted exposure level, measured in A-weighted decibels

(dBA)
(2) The exposure duration
US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1974 and World Health

Organization(WHO) recommends LAeq of 75 dB(A) during day time and 70 dB(A)
during night time for Industrial areas as permissible noise levels. For Commuters in the
Metro and at Stations also this can be considered as the upper limit and needs to be
maintained.
A weighted LAeq is considered to be most suitable for predicting general annoyance

and most of disturbance reactions observed. Indian Noise legislation does not permit
the increase in ambient noise level by 10 dB(A) due to project noise(Noise generated
by Metro operations. As per WHO and EPA Chronic exposures to 80.3 dBA for more
than 160 minutes per day may be expected to produce hearing loss in some exposed
individuals, and a 90.2-dBA level likewise may cause hearing loss with just 18 minutes
of exposure per day.
Though most of the Metros specify measurement of internal coach noise LAeq as per
ISO 3381:2011 and measurement of external noise as per ISO 3095:2010 American
Public Transit Association (APTA) specifies maximum pass by airborne noise from
train operationsLAmax at 85 dBA. European nations specify both maximum noise
levels (Lmax) and equivalent noise levels (LAeq) for given period of the day. For
example UK specifies LAmax 85dBA and LAeq 68 dBA for 06:00 Hrs to 2400 Hrs.
Noise and Vibration norms adopted by various Metros in other countries and Indian
Metros, method of measurement etc were studied in detail. Valuable inputs were
received from Industry and Delhi Metro in this regard. Based on the detailed study and
inputs from all members of the committee, following recommendations are made:
Recommended Noise Levels
Measurement of Internal coach noiseLaeq be done as per ISO 3381:2011(or latest)

and measurement of external noise as per ISO 3095:2010(or latest)
Type of Rolling Stock Interior Noise level (ISO Exterior Noise level (ISO
3381)LAeq (dBA) 3095)LAeq (dBA)
Stationary Running Stationary Running
80 kmph
750 Volts Via-duct 66 72/70 67 80
Third rail Tunnel 70 74/72 72 82
25 KV AC Via-duct 68 72/70 67 82
Stock Tunnel 72 75 NA NA
10
Vibrations
Ground-borne vibrations caused by the dynamic impact forces generated in the wheel-
rail interaction propagate in the soil and excite the foundation walls and air borne noise
caused by low frequency emissions can excite building structural components(walls
etc) above ground. The key factors of the vehicle / track system which determine
ground vibration are related to the track design and the maintenance of wheel and rail:
Design of the track, more precisely the properties of the track

mass/spring/damping system consisting of rail, pads, sleeper, ballast, slab,
embankment
Impact excitation from track discontinuities like switches & crossings and
insulation joints
Wheel / rail surface quality, roughness incl. corrugation, out-of-roundness,

dents, flats
Intensity of ground based noise and vibrations, are primarily dependent on track
structure, soil conditions and distance of such buildings from the railway track. It has to
be ensured that these vibration levels do not exceed the safety limits as prescribed in
ISO 14835 for which specific measures may need to be adopted while designing the
track structure.
Passengers are also subjected to the vibrations for which norms have been prescribed
by ISO 2631. It has been suggested by DMRC that only these norms be specified for
rolling stock manufacturers. This makes sense as the rolling stock manufacturers have
no control over ground vibrations emitting from Metro operations.
Recommendations
Vibrations to be measured as per ISO 2631, weighted acceleration should be less than
0.315 m/s2
1.2 Emergency Evacuation System

Committee studied the systems adopted by various Metros worldwide for emergency
Evacuation and these include
Side Evacuation system
Front Evacuation System
Side Evacuation
In case of side evacuation a walkway is provided along the track. People get out
through normal doors and move on the walkway which takes them to the nearest
station platform. The relative merits and demerits of this system are as follows:
11
Advantages:
1) In case of DC third rail system evacuation is faster as switching off of power to

third rail is not required.
2) Evacuation from the train is faster due to large number of doors.
Disadvantages:
1) In case of sharp curves,side evacuation is not considered safe as gap between
train and walkway on curve will be very large, which have to be bridged by some
plate/footboard
2) Side evacuation requires side walkway and hence via-duct width is
unnecessarily more and structures are heavy due to extra loading
3) Walking on raised walkway is not considered safe for children/elderly
passengers. Further there are chances of stampede on walkway
Front Evacuation system
In this concept evacuation door opens upwards on hinges & ramp is deployed to
tracks. Merits and demerits of this system are:
Advantages:
1) No need for extra walkway, hence size of the tunnel as well as via-duct
reduces hence more economical.
2) Evacuation is from emergency doors provided at the ends and can be
better regulated by motorman and stampede is prevented.
3) Walking is easier for passengers in this system as either they have to
walk through the coaches or on the track
Disadvantages:
1) Power block is necessary in case of 750 Volts DC third Rail system, which
may take some time
2) Exit from single emergency door may affect the faster evacuation.
Committee recommends that Indian Metros should adopt front evacuationonly with
door at the center as it is the most prevalent practice world-wide.
1.3Coupling Arrangement
There are three different types of couplers used in Metro Rolling Stock
Fully Automatic Mechanical, Pneumatic and Electrical coupler
Automatic Mechanical and Pneumatic coupling and Jumper cables (IV

couplers) for electrical connection.
12
Semi-Permanent coupler for mechanical and pneumatic coupling along with
electrical coupling is through jumper cables between cars.
Recommendations
1. For two ends of the train:

Automatic Mechanical and pneumatic coupling is recommended with Electric
coupling through jumper cables. Two rakes need to be coupled in the rescue
mode, here time is a consideration, hence automatic mechanical and
pneumatic coupling at the two end of the rakes are recommended. Electric
coupling shall be using jumpers.
2. Between coaches of the same basic unit:

Semi-permanentcoupler are recommended with Electric coupling through
jumper cables between cars, as these couplings are used only in sheds during
maintenance.
3. Between two basic units:

In case frequent interchanging of basic units or changes in car formations are
required, Automatic Mechanical, Pneumatic and Electrical couplermay be
provided. DMRC is providing these Automatic couplers between basic units.
As these couplers are most expensive (Approximately 4 times the cost of semi-
permanent coupler). Hence usage should be only need based.
1.4 Percentage Motorisation, Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rate, Power to

weight ratio
1.4.1 Percentage Motorisation

3 Car unit
For a basic 3 -car train there is no alternative but to have 66% motorization so as
to ensure that failure of one motor car does not result in immobilization of train in
the section.
4 Car unit/8 Car trains
In case of 4-car/ 8 car trains, only 50% and 75% motorisation is possible. DMRC,
who have sufficient experience with 50%,recommends 75% motorization both for
4 car and 8 car trains. 75% motorisation in 4 car rakes would require three different
type of cars. It is thus desirable to go in for 75% motorisation in case of 8 car rakes
and 50% for 4 car rakes.
13
6 Car/9 Car trains
In case of 6 car/9car, 66% motorization is a better option on account of following

considerations:
Advantages
Even with loss of one power car the operational performance is satisfactory,
hence motor coach control can be adopted instead of bogie control.
Smaller Traction Motor
Higher level of acceleration and declaration is possible, subject to adhesion

limits.
Higher regeneration level is achieved resulting in lower application of friction

braking and consequently less wear of pad /disc.
Energy efficiency is better
Chances of slip/slide even under the worst conditions are reduced due to
utilization of lower adhesion factor compared to the permissible values.
Disadvantages
Number of motor coaches will go up which will also result in increase in cost,
and increase in tare weight. There will however be some reduction on
account of bogie control in cost of propulsion equipment
Number of pantographs in 25 KV AC systems will go up. This can however

be reduced by having one common transformer and single panto for a 3 car
basic unit. This will reduce redundancy as two motor coaches will be out in
case of failures of traction transformer, hence can be permitted with only 6
car rake having two basic units of 3 car each.
The initial & maintenance cost of propulsion for 66% motorization will be higher,
however there will be savings towards energy cost. World wide 66% motoring is
accepted as the most appropriate.
Recommendations
Committee recommends 3 car or 6car per rake depending on the traffic projections
with 66% motorization should be adopted as the standard for all future Metros. In case
of 3 car rakes both motored cars should have independent propulsion equipment for
complete redundancy.
14
Recommended Operating characteristics Acceleration, Deceleration, jerk rate etc
are as given below
Characteristic 50% Powering 66% Powering
Maximum Design speed 95kmph 95 kmph
Maximum operating speed 85kmph 85kmph
Average acceleration from 0 to 0.8 1.0

40 kmph in m/s2 for fully
loaded train at level track with
AW3 load standees 80/m2 and
seating approx. 50 p/car
Service braking rate from 80 1.0 1.0 m/s2

kmph to standstill up to fully
loaded train on level tangent
track
Emergency braking rate from 1.3 1.3 m/s2

80 kmph to standstill up to fully
loaded train on level tangent
track
Maximum jerk rate in 0.7 0.7

acceleration or braking in m/s3
Minimum Adhesion level 0.20 0.20
1.5 Propulsion EquipmentSingle source or Consortiums/JVs

Issue is whether bids be invited from coach manufacturers as single source with option
to source propulsion equipment from sub contractors, or consortiums/JV of coach
manufacturers and Propulsion equipment supplier.
Rolling stock manufacture involves four distinct requirements, namely:
i) Car body/mechanicals,
ii) train system design & integration,
iii) Propulsion system including TCMS and
iv) Interfacing, testing & commissioning with full MRTS system.
15
The above role is normally divided amongst two different set of firms
1. Car manufacturers
They specialize in manufacture of car body/mechanicals and integration of
propulsion system and TCMS from the specialist suppliers.
Examples are BEML, CAF, ROTEM
2. Propulsion Equipment suppliers

Propulsion system comprises of Traction Motor, main converter-inverters,
auxiliary converters, transformers & TCMS. The propulsion system is quite
crucial sub-system of the train. Responsibilities of propulsion system supplier
include:
Supply of propulsion equipment including TCMS
Interfacing with other subsystems like HVAC, Lighting, Doors, ATC/ATO,

Brake System, Signaling, Passenger Information system, Power supply etc.
Commissioning and Testing
Examples are Toshiba, MELCO, Hitachi, SIEMENS, Bombardier etc.
There are suppliers who supply the complete rolling stock including propulsion system.
Examples are Bombardier, SIEMENS, ALSTOM, Ansaldo Breda etc.
Advantages of Non consortium approach ie when propulsion equipment suppliers can
be sub contractors:
Enables competitive pricing as
Rolling Stock manufacture that manufacture their own propulsion
equipment can offer better competitive price
Rolling stock manufacturers (who do not manufacture propulsion

equipment) will have enough negotiating power with Propulsion
equipment suppliers. This will reduce the price.
As the number of Propulsion equipment manufacturers are limited,

consortium approach will restrict the number of bids to number of
propulsion equipment manufacturers and thus competition.
It will promote indigenous manufacture at competitive price as

indigenous capability for car manufacture is available in the country and
dependence on tie up with a particular propulsion equipment vendor will
reduce.
16
Recommendations
Committee recommends that car manufacturers can either bid as a single vendor with
their own propulsion equipment in case it is manufactured by them and will have an
option to source the propulsion equipment from any propulsion equipment supplier as
a sub contractor. There should be no compulsion on the car manufacturer to have
propulsion equipment supplier as a consortium/JV partner for bidding as consortium.
Car manufacturer will have the option to bid as a single vendor or in consortium with
propulsion manufacturer
1.6 Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility criteria should aim at encouraging competition, ensuring reliability and quality
and indigenization. Eligibility criteria have a direct bearing on the cost. Broader criteria
ensures competitive prices.
Rolling stock comprises of Car body and Propulsion equipment. As there are two
distinct set of suppliers for Car body manufacturing and propulsion equipment, and
Non consortium approach for propulsion equipment supplier is recommended, it is
necessary to have separate eligibility/qualification criteria for these two separate set of
suppliers.
Eligibility criteria for car manufacturer must ensure quality, reliability and competitive
price of the rolling stock. Taking the views of Industry and Metros into consideration,
following eligibility criteria for Rolling stock supplier is recommended.
Eligibility criteria for car manufacturer:

Bidder consortium or its members, individually or jointly as member of other consortium
have experience and carried out vehicle design, Interface, Assembly & Supply, Testing
and Commissioning and should have following credentials:
1. Minimum number of cars 300 metro (i.e. MRT,LRT, Sub-urban railway or
high speed railways out of which minimum 200
cars shall be of either stain less steel or
Aluminum in the last 10 years.
2. No of countries At least one country other than the country of
manufacture or in India.
3. Operation Performance 150 cars out of above must be operating
satisfactorily against more than one contract in at
least one country other than the country of
manufacture or in India for last 5 years.
4. Projects executed through TOT arrangement with global player may be taken
as experience. This will promote indigenization.
5. Indian subsidiary companies be eligible to bid on the basis of the global
credentials of parent company.
17
Eligibility criteria for Propulsion Equipment Supplier:
Propulsion equipment supplier can be consortium member or a sub-contractor meeting
the following requirements:
a) Must have cumulative experience of minimum 10 years in the Design and
manufacturing of propulsion equipment (Traction converter-Inverter,
Auxiliary converter/Inverter and Traction Motor rolling stock).
b) Propulsion equipment supplied must have been in satisfactory revenue

operation for at least five(5) years in minimum 500 cars comprising of both
powered and non-powered cars supplied against minimum five different
contracts in the Metros of least one country other than the country of
c) Projects executed through TOT arrangement with global player may be

taken as experience. This will promote indigenization.
d) Indian subsidiary companies be eligible to bid on the basis of the global

1.7 Control & communication protocol

Train integrated management system (TIMS) is a complete, integrated system for the
control and monitoring of the train-borne equipment. TIMS provides control and
monitoring, diagnostic and reporting of the train-borne equipment in a redundant
manner.Train Control & Management (TCMS) is a subsystem of TIMS and controls
and monitors all train equipment.
Subsystems of the train utilize microprocessor-based control. The subsystems are
inter-linked via a communication data bus system for the monitoring, fault data logging
and for first line diagnostics of faults on board the train. Communication is through the
Train Bus (ARCNET) and Local bus (RS-485). IEC 60571 is the International standard
for TIMS hardware.
All the Reputed rolling stock manufacturers have developed their own Train Integrated
Management Control System (TIMS) over the years. Even though communication
protocols are based on international standards but achieving interoperability with
subsystems of alternative vendors is generally quite difficult. Support of the TIMS
manufacturer is required for achieving integration.
Recommendations for TIMS
Conformity to IEC62280-1 (Safety related communication in closed transmission
systems)
The hardware systems deployed should conform to international standards.
There should be Open protocol between TCMS & respective sub-systems.

18
Also Transmission data flow in the network between TCMS & sub-systems can be
standardized, so that subsystem supplier of different makes can meet the requirement
of monitoring & control of the various parameters through TCMS. Gradually sub-
system supplier should adopt IP technology.
1.8 Driverless Train Operation

Main Features
Automatic departure and run from station to station, including automatic turn-
back
Door re-opening on train hold command
Remote start of stalled trains
Attendant responsibility:
control passenger doors
prevent person injuries between cars or between platform and train
ensure safe starting conditions
set in/set off operation
supervise the status of the train
Driverless system on the Indian Metro Projects
Driverless system is the technology, which is well proven now and is strongly
recommended for use in Indian Metro system.
Techno-Commercials considerations are in favour of driver-less system as extra
capex can be recovered in 7-10 years time.
Driverless system needs very high reliability and hence detaileddesigns requires
extra time in RAM assurance activities.
Approval and safety certificate from CRS due to lack of technical experience,
which can probably be managed.
Driver less operation is required to achieve 85 to 90 seconds frequency for full

utilization of Metro infrastructure capacity. This will require communication based Train
Control (CBTC) system. Driverless Train Operation can be adopted in phases with
signaling up-gradation.
1.9 Indigenisation
Rolling Stock manufacture includes

Manufacture of Carbody& Bogie frames, assembly, integration & testing.
Infrastructural facilities for manufacture of car body and bogie frame and its
integration are already available in the country. Indigenous sources for certain
outfitting items like GFRP panels, grab poles & rails, window glasses, glass
wool insulation, electrical panels, battery box, stainless steel and aluminum
fabricated items, etc are also available.
19
manufacture of propulsion system including TCMS and other critical sub-
systems like propulsion, brake, door, HVAC, passenger address & Passenger
information system, CCTV etc.
Car manufacture
Indigenisation of Car body manufacture has already taken place as following
manufacturing facilities have already been set up:
BT coach manufacturing unit at Vadodara
BEML Bangalore under TOT from Hyundai Rotem
Alstom setting up unit near Chennai
CAF setting up manufacturing unit in Haryana
Kawasaki is also planning to set up coach production facilities.
ICF and RCF have facilities to manufacture EMU/MEMU coaches which can be
up graded to Metro coaches.
Above facilities can take care of the future Metro needs. There is however a need to
protect these investments and some incentives need to be given to these units for
effectively utilizing the facilities already created.
Propulsion equipment
The critical area is indigenization of manufacture of propulsion system, TCMS and
other critical sub systems. Global suppliers with satisfactory performance record need
to be encouraged to either set up their subsidiary in India or transfer technology to an
Indian company through JV. Following steps are necessary to achieve this:
Specifications for both rolling stock and traction distribution system are
standardized.This will help indigenous
Standardization will result in higher volumes. It will be possible to leaverage the bulk
procurement by a single agency to achieve development of indigenous industry
through TOT as has also been done by China.
Presently individual metros are procuring rolling stock in small quantities with different
specifications and clause to manufacture 60 to 70% cars indigenously. This does not
promote indigenisation of propulsion equipment which is mostly imported. As in case of
car body manufacture, indigenous manufacture of complete propulsion equipment in
the phased manner also needs to be mandated in the rolling stock tenders.
MoUD in order to promote indigenous manufacture of propulsion equipment should
give development orders for small quantities to local firms who can either develop on
their own or through collaboration with global suppliers. IR has adopted this approach
for development of indigenous three phase propulsion equipment for locomotive and
EMUs. After successful tests and trials these sources can be considered as regular
sources for propulsion equipment.
Committee, thus, recommends that a system of bulk order placement may be devised
preferably by MoUD by combining requirement of smaller metros. Orders should be
placed with at least 70% indigenization clause for both propulsion equipment and car
manufacture through TOT with indigenous manufacturers or setting up of Indian
subsidiaries.
20
2.0 TERMS OF REFERENCE OF THE SUB COMMITTEE ON ROLLING STOCK
Item No. 1 - Noise and Vibration level (including RS, Track etc.)
Terms of Reference
Study of the Environmental Laws in India and extracting the relevant statutory
requirements.
Study of noise and vibration criteria adopted by various metros in India in their
rolling stock and trackwork specifications.
Study of similar international regulations in other countries having vast
knowledge base in this field such as USA, Germany, Japan, Singapore etc.
Study of regulations regarding protection of ASI monuments (heritage
structures) from vibration generated by metro trains operation.
Study of regulations in other countries regarding protection of heritage
structures.
Analysis of above and recommendations for acceptable noise & vibration criteria
for rolling stock and track including suggestions for integrated responsibilities or
clarity of interface.
Report of above study.
Item No. 2 - Emergency Evacuation System

Terms of reference
Study of the NFPA 130 and other relevant national/international standards
regarding emergency evacuation system
Study of practices adopted in various metro systems in India and elsewhere
along with the underlying logic/reasons (at least 3 metros each in USA, Europe,
Study of particular requirements of emergency evacuation with respect to
elevated, underground and at-grade routes.
Study of report by NOVA (available with DMRC)/COMET (a society of heavy
metros) in this regard.
Study of procedure adopted during emergency evacuation such as power off,
ETS activation, signaling interface etc. particularly in systems having third rail
traction.
Analysis of data collected including structured presentation of database.
Report covering all the above issues including summary and recommendations.
Item No. 3 - Coupling arrangement (Automatic, semi-automatic etc.)

Terms of reference
Study of various types of couplers being used in Indian railways and various
metros in India and elsewhere.
Study of the relevant Indian and International standards in this regard.
Study of functional advantages offered by various types of couplers (automatic
viz-a-viz. semi-automatic couplers).
Collection of data regarding various suppliers of various types of couplers both
in India and elsewhere
Information gathering regarding regular suppliers of such items to Indian
Railways, DMRC, BMRCL, Kolkata Metro.
21
Preliminary cost analysis of each type of couplers including studying impact of
imported components/assembly.
Study of maintenance practices of trains being followed by Indian Railways,
Kolkata Metro, DMRC and BMRC and assessment of instances of coupling and
de-coupling of units and coaches in depots as well as on lines.
Study of an assessment report conducted by BMRCL in this regard.
Report comprising above issues, analysis, recommendations and way forward.
Item No. 4 - Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rake, Power to weight ratio/ %

motorization
Terms of reference
Study and analysis of key parameters of rolling stock viz.
Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rate and suggest Power-to-weight ratio & %
motorization and suggestion for standardization
Above study shall be based on cost benefit analysis carried out using
appropriate simulation tools as well as results of actual experience of 2MC +
1TC (of BMRCL) and 1MC+1TC (of DMRC). The study shall analyse impact on
transit/round trip time with above configuration of trains.
Item No. 5 - Eligibility/qualification criteria for procurement
Item No.6 - Propulsion Single source or consortium/JV approach.
Item No.7 - Control & communication protocol common/published

Terms of reference
Study of impact of use of vendor specific(proprietary) software/protocol for
TCMS on interoperability/use of subsystems of different makes as well as
impact on cost of rolling stock
Study of Control & Communication protocol Common/published
standard/standards for Train Control & Management System (TCMS) used by
different metros in India and abroad and provide suggestions/recommendations.
Item No.8 - Driver less control

Terms of reference
Collection of data regarding metros having driverless train operation and study
of the same for adoption in metros in India.
Study eligibility/qualification criteria for procurement of rolling stock being
followed by different metros and Indian Railways.
Item No.9 -Indigenisation

Terms of reference
Identifying constraints in process of indigenous development and evolving
strategy for placing development orders for assemblies/systems/subsystems.
Recommend appropriate eligibility/qualification criteria for wider competition and
phased Indigenization in a planned manner without diluting quality.
22
3.0 Noise and Vibration Level
3.1 Environmental Laws in India and the relevant statutory requirements.
Noise Legislation in India
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986) read with rule 5 of the
Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, the Central Government has made the rules
for the regulation and control of noise producing and generating sources,
namely:The Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000. Rules stipulate
following norms:
Place Limits in dB(A) Leq

Day time Night Time
1 Industrial Area 75 70
2 Commercial area 65 55
3 Residential Area 55 45
4 Silence Zone 40 30
Noise and Pollution (Regulation and Control) (Amendment) Rules 2009
Noise Pollution Rules have been amended vide above notification on 9th March 2009
by Ministry of Forest and Environment. Operative para relevant to Metro is given
below:
Implications for Metros of the above legislation:
Environmental Noise is recognized as a major Health problem. A weighted LAeq is

considered to be most suitable for predicting general annoyance and most of
disturbance reactions observed. Indian Noise legislation does not permit the
increase in ambient noise level by 10 dB(A) due to project noise(Noise generated by
Metro operations. Day time and night time values of permissible Noise levels have
been specified by the Act. Act also specifies a LAeq of 75 dB(A) during day time and
70 dB(A) during night time for Indusrial areas. For Commuters in the Metro and at
Stations also this can be considered as the upper limit and needs to be maintained.
23
3.2 International regulations in other countries having vast knowledge base in
this field such as USA, Germany, Japan, Singapore etc.
Noise exposure is a function of 2 main factors: (1) the frequency-weighted exposure

level, measured in A-weighted decibels (dBA), and (2) the exposure duration. US
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1974 and World Health
Organization(WHO) recommended daily allowable exposure times are
SL TIME OF EXPOSURE LEQ DB(A)
1 24 hours 70 dBA
2 8 hours 75 dBA
3 2.7 hours 80 dBA
4 0.9 hours 85 dBA
5 0.3 hours 90 dBA
Chronic exposures that exceed these allowable combinations of duration and noise
level are expected to produce Noise induced hearing loss (NIIHL) in some
members of the exposed population.
Based on the WHO and EPA recommendations, chronic exposure to 80.3 dBA for
more than 160 minutes per day may be expected to produce hearing loss in some
exposed individuals, and a 90.2-dBA level likewise may cause hearing loss with just
18 minutes of exposure per day.
The American National Standards Institute and the US National Research

Councilrecommend Day-Night average sound level (Ldn) for assessment of
environmental noise as do most federal agencies and administrations. Ldn of 65 dB
is the onset of a normally unacceptable noise zone. All international agencies have
cognizance over use of Ldn value above 55 dB as the threshold value for defining
noise impact in urban residential areas.
The Federal transit Administration (FTA), US published impact assessment

procedures to be used for mass transit projects. These criteria are based upon
comparison of the existing outdoor ambient noise to future outdoor sound levels
from the proposed project. Unlike Indian noise regulations that permit up to 10 dBA
increase in ambient noise due to project noise. Noise increase permitted by the
24
FTA is graded. It allows a 10 dBA increase where existing noise exposure is 42
dB(A), but only a 1 dB(A ) increase where existing exposure is 70 dB(A)
American Public Transit Association (APTA) proposed noise guidelines based

upon the maximum A-weighted sound level (LAmax of single vehicle pass by are
given in the table below:
Area Description Maximum Pass by sound level

dB(A)
Single family Multi family Commercial
dwellings dwellings buildings
Low Density 70 75 80
Residential
High Density 75 80 85
residential
Commercial 80 80 85
Industrial/Highway 80 85 85
World Health Organisation(WHO) recommended a 16 hour day-time Leq of 55 dB

and approximately a 45 dB nighttime Leq to prevent serious annoyance
US Housing and Urban Development criteria for noise for L1,L99 and LNP
L1 represents the maximum noise event which takes about 1% of measurement period
L99 is the background noise, which represents the lowest level during the
measurement period
L1
Normally Unacceptable 73.5<L1 <86.0 dBA
Clearly Unacceptable > 86.0 dBA
L99
Normally Unacceptable 53.0 <L99 <68.0 dBA
Clearly Unacceptable > 68.0 dBA
American Public Transit Association (APTA) guidelines for maximum pass by

airborne noise from train operations are given in the table below:
Community Area Maximum Pass by sound level dB(A)

Description Single family Multi family Commercial
dwellings dwellings buildings
Low density residential 70 75 80
Average residential 75 75 80
High-density 75 80 85
residential
Commercial 80 80 85
Industrial/Highway 80 85 85
25
According to UK Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) , the onset of
annoyance due to a new project activity, is considerable if the change is more than 10
dB(A)
Railway Noise Impact criteria followed in various countries
Table below shows the various noise impact criteria followed by different European
nations. Specific maximum noise levels (Lmax) and equivalent noise levels (LAeq) for
given period of the day as related to these sensitive areas are specific.
Country Period LA.maxdBA LAeq (dBA)

Australia 06h00-06h00 85 60
Denmark 06h00-06h00 88 60
UK 06h00-24h00 85 68
24h00-06h00 85 63
USA 06h00-06h00 77,55
Sweden 06h00-06h00 63
Japan 07h00-22h00 70 60
22h00-07h00 70 55
Germany 06h00-22h00 59
22h00-06h00 49
France 06h00-22h00 60
22h00-06h00 55
3.3 Major Noise Sources from Metro Systems
Noise radiated from train operation and track structures generally constitute the
major noise sources from Metro System. Air borne noise is radiated from at grade
and elevated operations, ground borne noise and vibration is of prime concern for
underground operations. Following Noise need to be considered in case of Metro
System Design
a) Way side Noise
Way side noise is very important for residential areas,
hospitals,schoolsetcfalling in the vicinity of Metro Systems. There are four
basic sources of way side air borne noise.
1. Wheel rail Noise that is directly radiated from the vibrating wheels and
rails
2. Propulsion equipment including noise from traction motors, cooling fans
reduction gears etc.
3. Auxiliary equipment like compressors, ventilation system, A/C units and
other car mounted equipment
4. Elevated structure Noise radiated by vibrations of the via-duct
components excited by train pass-by.
While all countries specify LAeqaverage noise levels as given in the table
above, some countries specify maximum sound levels Lmax also for noise
impact assessment.
26
b) Interior Noise inside the cars
It directly affects the daily commuters, as commuters spend up to 1 hour in
the cars, while travelling from one end to the other. Average noise levels and
peak noise levels both are relevant here. Sources contributing to interior
noise are:
External airborne noise transmitted through the car shell

Structure borne noise and vibration
Airborne noise from internal sources
Any of these noise sources can dominate the interior noise level depending upon
the car design and operating conditions.
c) Noise in transit stations
There are five major sources
Trains entering, leaving and stationary at stations
Auxiliary equipment like air conditioning and ventilation equipment,

escalators etc.
Passenger activity
Public address system
Street or highway traffic noise especially on over ground stations
Reverberant build up noise etc.
3.4 Study of Noise assessment inside the Greater Cairo Underground Metro
ByMostafa E Aly
L1 ranges from 87.8 to 102.5 dBA., so it exceeds the limit by about 1.5 to 16.5
dBA. The highest value of L1 was noted between El-Gamaah and El-Behoos
stations, this is due to the tunnel entrance and the sharp turn of 90, which
increases the slip between the wheels and the rails, which in turn increases the
noise emission.The sources of noise at the platforms are the aerodynamic and
mechanical noises of the train, the train siren, the brakes when applied, the
passengers themselves and the attention signal sound systems.
The noise problem is very significant especially inside the metro units. This
increase of noise levels is due to the lack of air in the ventilating system of the
units, which causes the passengers to open the side windows to compensate
forthe required quantity of air. This situation permits the outside noise to enter the
units.
27
The side windows are sound-proof windows, which prevent outside noise from
entering the units. The closing of the side windows attenuates the noise inside the
units by about 20 to 25 dBA. The noise outside the metro units is due to the
mechanical and aerodynamic noise, whichincreases by reflection of sound from
the tunnel walls. The tunnel has a cylindrical shapewhich reflects the sound from
any source to the centre axis of the tunnel where the trains run.The noise at the
station platforms is due to the application of the air sirens of the trains andthe
application of the brakes. The increase of noise levels at the platforms is also due
to thereflections from the side walls, which are covered with smooth ceramic tiles.
Study recommendations
Increasing the efficiency of the ventilating system inside the metro units to
avoid the opening of the side windows.
Informing the passengers of the importance of closing the side windows
Coating the tunnel walls with some kind of sound absorbing materials to
decrease thereflection of sound into the metro units.
Reducing the approach speed of the trains to reduce the time of application
of brakes.
Replacing the brake lining materials with other more efficient ones to reduce
the timeof application of brakes
Changing the smooth ceramic tiles of the station platforms walls by other
kinds which can absorb sound to decrease the total noise level at the station
platforms.
3.5 A study of Noise Levels associated with New York Citys Mass Transit
System by Richard Neitzel, Robyn R. M. Gershon and others
Mass Transit noise exposure has the potential to exceed limits recommended by
the WHO and the US Environmental ProtectionAgency and thus cause Noise
induced hearing loss among riders given sufficient exposures. Noise
measurements made are given in the tables below:
28
Against 24 hour 70-dBA WHO and EPA suggested exposure limit and the National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 8-hour 85-dBA Recommended
Exposure Limit, Leq measurements exceeded 70dBA threshold at all subways. 7%
subways had mean vehicle Leq levels greater than 85 dBA and 23% had mean
Leq platform levels greater than 85 dBA. Mean aboveground vehicle Leq levels
were 1 to 5 dBA lower than above ground platforms levels. Mean vehicle Leq
levels for underground measurements were always lower than those for
underground platforms. (Table 3 below)
Lmax Levels
Table 2 below shows the associated Lmax levels with each transit type. MTA
subways had the highest maximum noise levels on average 90.4 dBA. Highest
Lmax level among all platform measurement was 102.1 dBA at MTA subway
station. Half the subway lines had average vehicle and platform levels that exceed
90 dBA
29
30
3.6 Noise Levels specified by Various Metrosworld wide
31
Noise Study on Indian Metros
Following Noise related studies have been done on Delhi Metro which were made
available by DMRC
Noise Impact Assessment of Mass Rapid Transit Systems in Delhi byShri

Naveen Garg, Omkar Sharma and S. Maji
Noise Control Measures for Delhi Metro by National Physical Laboratory.
Train Noise Level Study by General Consultants to Delhi Metro for Phase I
Metro Railway Noise and Vibration Causes and solution for DMRC Phase-III
Quoting from the above studies mainly carried out after phase-I of DMRC,
observations are as follows:
At Stations
Average value of background noise levels in Metro stations was about 59+3 dB(A).
Average level in underground stations was 2 dB(A) lower
Average value of exterior noise levels when trains were standing in metro stations was
76 dB(A) in all sections.
Noise level due to train entering and leaving the station near exit points in underground
station was higher by 5 dB due to reverberant noise buildup of train noise in station
space.
Interior Noise
DMRCs target value of 85 dB(A) fixed for interior noise level in moving trains running at
80 kmph with all auxiliary equipment in operation is on higher side by 5-10 dB(A) when
compared to noise level of 75dB(A) experienced for face to face conversation
elsewhere. Interior noise levels were 10 to 12 dB(A) lower in at grade sections and
elevated corridor.
Average interior noise levels observed in moving trains were higher by 5 dB(A) at
90+1dB(A)
Door operation noise was also higher by 5 dB(A) vis--vis specified level of 72 dB(A)
Exterior Noise levels OR Way side Noise Levels
Way side noise levels were 10 dB(A) lower than specified at 60 dB(A) on at grade
racks at 25 meter.
32
Noise specifications in various procurement tenders by Indian Metros
Internal Noise Leq in dBA

Name of Tender Under Stationary Under running Remarks
Metro Number condition as per ISO conditions as
3381 Saloon/Cab per ISO 3381
Saloon/Cab
viaduct tunnel viaduct tunnel
DMRC RS1* 68 NA 72/70 92/90 At 80 kmph
RS2* 68 75/72 72/70 75 At 80 kmph
RS3** 68 75/72 72/70 75 At 85 kmph
RS10** 64/63 68 72/68 72/68 at 50 kmph
75/70 and 75/70 at 75
kmph
Mumbai Line 1 64 NA 70/70 NA
BMRCL ---- 68/62 75/72 72/70 80/78

dBA dBA dBA dBA
CMRCL ---- 70/71 NA 75/78 NA
dBA dBA
KMRCL ----
L&T ---- 70 dBA NA 74 dBA NA
HMR
RMGL ---- 68 NA 72
External Noise levels specified in various procurement tenders:
Name of Tender Under Stationary At 80 kmph Remarks

Metro Number condition as per ISO speed as per
3381 ISO 3381
viaduct Tunnel viaduct tunnel
DMRC RS1* 61 dBA 72 dBA 80 dBA Not At 80 kmph
specifi
ed
RS2* 67 dBA NS 84dBA At 80 kmph
RS3** 67 dBA NS 84 dBA At 85 kmph
RS10** 67 dBA 82 dBA Lpa5 at 75 kmph
Mumbai Line 1 70 dBA 80 dBA
BMRCL ---- 67 dBA 82 dBA
CMRCL ---- 65 dBA 81 to Values at 15 meter
82 dBA
KMRCL ----
L&T ---- 68dBA 85dBA 72 dBA and 78
HMR dBA
RMGL ---- 72 dBA 82 dBA
33
Door operation noise levels specified in various procurement tenders:
Name Tender As per ISO 3381 Remarks

of Number
Metro
Sliding Locking/Unlocking
operation
DMRC RS1* 72 NS
RS2* 72 78
RS3** 72 78
BMRCL ---- 72 dBA 78 dBA
CMRCL ----
KMRCL ----
L&T ---- 72 dBA 78 dBA
HMR
RMGL ---- 72 78
*All values measured are LpAeq.5s AWeighted equivalent

continuous sound pressure level
where the measurement time
interval T is five second
(T=5s).
**All values measured are LpA5 - After applying the time and
frequency weighting, the
sampled measurement data of
20 seconds (10000 readings
sampled with 500 Hz from one
microphone) is divided into
classes corresponding to each
level (e.g. 10 classes per dB).
For each class the frequency
over the measurement time is
calculated. A histogram of the
frequency of each LpAF level over
the measurement time is made.
This is then converted to a graph
over cumulative relative
frequency. The value for 95% of
the time is the LpA5 level, i.e. the
A weighted sound pressure level
exceeded for 5% of the
measurement time period.
34
3.7 Deliberations on Noise specifications for Metro Rolling Stock
Method of Measurement
ISO 3095 is the international standard followed for measuring external

noise.Track parameters described in ISO 3095 that influences the rolling stock
noise are given below:
Internal Noise in the Cars
Passengers on an average spend 40 minutes in the train. Noise level of a

normal conversation is 60 to 70 dBA. A 95 dBA noise level is 10 times more
intense than an 85-dBA a 95 dBA noise level and 100 times more intense than a
75-dBA noise level. Taking into consideration the limits of daily exposure for
NIHL of 8 hour-85 dBA or 18 mins for 90.4 dBA and the need for reducing noise
pollution inside the cars, the levels for Leq and L max need to be defined.
As can be seen from the table above Leq level of 64 to 71 dBA under stationary
conditions on via-duct and 75 dBA in tunnels and 70 to 75 dBA on via-duct and
80 to 95 dBA in the tunnels at speeds around 80 kmph have been specified. In
35
comparison World Metros as per table given above specify Leq levels of 64 to
68 dBA under stationary conditions and 68 dBA to 77 dBA at speeds around 60
kmph. No LAmaxvalue have been specified.
Most of the Metroshavejust mentioned the values specified in their tenders. DMRC has
however recommended that Maximum level of noise Lpa5 and not average noise
levels Laeq, as has been done in the past, be measured.
Siemens have also recommended values as specified in RS10 with method of

measurement as per ISO3381 and ISO 3095.
M/S Bombardier have proposed measurement of LpAeqt as per ISO 3095 latest
version. Interior Noise at grade should be 65 dBA at standstill and 75 dBA in saloon
and 70 dBA in cab at 80 kmph according to ISO 3381 latest. M/S Bombardier have
proposed noise increment of +2 dBA for via-duct and +5 dBA for tunnels depending on
type of tunnel.
External Noise
External Noise need to be limited taking into consideration Environment Protection

Rules as mentioned above.The Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000
stipulates a maximum Leq of 75 dBA during day and 70 dBA during night under worst
conditions in Industrial areas and a maximum of 55 dBA during day and 45 dB during
night time in residential areas.
Metros internationally specify LeqAT of 55 to 65dBA under stationary conditions and

LeqATpof 73dBA to 84 dBA at speeds varying from 40 kmph to 80 kmphat 7.5 meters
from the track. 68 dBA levels of external noise as given in the table above.
Indian Metros have specified Laeqof 61 to 72 dBA under stationary conditions and 80
to 85 dBA under running conditions at speeds varying from 50 to 85 kmph. Delhi Metro
has prescribed Lap5 for RS3 and RS 10 and recommends the same. M/S Siemens
have recommended LAeqT of 67 dBA under stationary conditions and 82 dBA at 75
kmph. M/S Bombardier have recommended average of LpAeq around the train of 68
dBA at standstill and 83 dBA at 80 kmph.
Door closing/opening noise
Metros internationally generally do not specify door closing/opening noise. M/S

Siemens and M/s Bombardier have also not recommended the same. Delhi Metro
have also not specified the same in RS10. This gets included in internal noise and
external noise specification as it affects both L Amax and LeqAt
Though general recommendation is to specify Laeqt as per ISO 3381. DMRC is of the
view that it is not possible to accurately measure LAeq level and hence proposed LpA5
instead of LpAeq. Lpa5 gives maximum noise levels against average noise levels
36
LpAeq. It is however mentioned that LAmax level are generally 10 to 12 dB higher than
average noise levels(Laeq). Hence in that case specification will have to be different.
Recommended Noise Levels

Measurement of Internal coach noiseLaeq be done as per ISO 3381:2011(or latest)
and measurement of external noise as per ISO 3095:2010(or latest)
Type of Rolling Stock Interior Noise level (ISO Exterior Noise level (ISO
3381)LAeq (dBA) 3095)LAeq (dBA)
Stationary Running Stationary Running
80 kmph
750 Volts Via-duct 66 72/70 67 80
Third rail Tunnel 70 74/72 72 82
25 KV AC Via-duct 68 72/70 67 82
Stock Tunnel 72 75 NA NA
Delhi Metro has proposed that instead of LAeq these level be specified for LpA5
(Project Noise LAmax that exceed 5% of the time measured with T=20 seconds) as
has also been stipulated in RS10 be followed as there is very little ambiguity in its
measurement. Committee is however of the view that the Measurements be done as
stipulated in latest ISO 3381 and ISO 3095 as has been specified in all the other
tenders so far and recommended by majority of the members because all the limits
and norms exists in terms of Laeq only.
3.8 Vibrations from Metro operations

The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains (Amendment and
Validation) Act 2010,
Act imposes restrictions in carrying out construction work within 100 meters of a
protected monument. Relevant excerpts from Sec 20A of the act is reproduced below:
*[20A. Declaration of prohibited area and carrying out public work or other works
in prohibited area.- Every area, beginning at the limit of the protected area or the
protected monument, as the case may be, and extending to a distance of one hundred
meters in all directions shall be the prohibited area in respect of such protected area or
protected monument:
Provided that the Central Government may, on the recommendation of the Authority,
by notification in the Official Gazette, specify an area more than one hundred meters to
be the prohibited area having regard to the classification of any protected monument or
protected area, as the case may be, under section 4A.
37
(2) Save as otherwise provided in section 20C, no person, other than an
archaeological officer, shall carry out any construction in any prohibited area.
(3) In a case where the Central Government or the Director-General, as the case may
be, is satisfied that--
(a) it is necessary or expedient for carrying out such public work or any project
essential to the public; or
(b) such other work or project, in its opinion, shall not have any substantial adverse
impact on the preservation, safety, security of, or, access to, the monument or its
immediate surroundings, it or he may, notwithstanding anything contained in sub-
section (2), in exceptional cases and having regard to the public interest, by order and
for reasons to be recorded in writing, permit, such public work or project essential to
the public or other constructions, to be carried out in a prohibited area:
This act is a legislative measure to ensure thatheritage buildings are not damaged
during the construction stage of the project and is also protected with harmful effects of
noise and vibrations on the old weak and structurally weak buildings and historical
monuments
Regulations in other countries regarding protection of heritage structures.
Some countries prescribe the limits of Ground base Noise levels and vibrations
reaching the buildings, emanating from Metro projects. Maximum permissible values of
ground borne noise & vibration from train operations as recommended are as follows:
1) for Ground Borne Noise:

for all residential buildings 40 d(),
for other sensitive buildings (such as education i.e.Universities, schools,
libraries, and also hospitals,churches theatres and archaeological sites
and museums: 35 dB(A)
for concert halls & TV/Radio studios: 25 d()
2) for Vibration: (max ppv at z direction):

0,5 mm/sec for buildings & relevant sensitive buildings
0,2 mm/sec for archaeological sites and museums
Study of Vibration and Noise associated with Metro Operations
An important adverse effect of Metro operation is the increased level of vibration

transmitted to buildings in close proximity. Furthermore the vibration in buildings is the
result of the direct transmission of ground borne vibration. Thereare two ways in which
metro traffic can induce vibration in nearby buildings
38
Ground-borne vibration caused by the dynamic impact forces generated in the
wheel-rail inter phase due to irregularities of both wheels and tracks that can
propagate in the soil and excite the foundation walls of nearby buildings,
beneath ground.
Air-borne noise, caused by low frequency emissions that can excite building
structural components (walls etc.) above ground.
Noise generated by Rail Wheel interaction
The excitation of noise and vibrations stem from the wheel-rail interaction and hence is
primarily governed by the properties of the vehicle and the track. This is the case for
excitation of air-borne and ground-borne noise with frequency content above 50 Hz [3].
Ground-borne vibrations however has an essential part of the energy concentrated to
frequencies below 50 Hz. The excitation of these long-wavelength vibrations will be
governed also by the ground properties and hence the excitation will also be site-
specific. In rare cases the vibration emissions from the railway constitutes a safety risk
for the railway vehicle itself. However the vibrations excited in the wheel-rail contact
39
are primarily a problem for the environment adjacent to the railway lines. The vibration
propagates in the ground and becomes problematic as it reaches buildings or other
constructions in the vicinity of the track. The issues are primarily related to discomfort
experienced by residents but can also be more severe and damage buildings or disturb
sensitive equipment in e.g. hospitals and laboratories.
Seismic waves are usually called ground-borne vibration, or structure-borne vibration,

when they reach buildings in the vicinity of the source and are still sufficiently strong to
causeperceivable vibrations. The closer the frequencies of the seismic waves are to
the buildings natural frequency,the stronger the excitation and hence larger amplitudes
will be transmitted through the walls andreach the floors or ceilings. These usually act
as amplifiers at the point of emission and can result in clearlynoticeable vibration,
usually in the range of 180 Hz.The occupants perception of ground-borne vibration
depends on a persons position, their activity, sensitivity,ambient influences, as well as
the duration and strength of the vibration. Details can be found in theinternational norm
ISO 2631 [1], which evaluates the exposure of human bodies to shock and vibration.
More specific information in regard to mechanical vibration solely as a result of rail

systems is found inISO 14837-1 [2]. It explains the mechanisms of excitation and the
general circumstances of interest, beforeproviding guidance on how measurements in
affected rooms should be carried out.The norm approaches the issue of ground-borne
noise, which is a by-product of ground-borne vibration. Ifthe vibration of ceilings, floors
or walls is strong enough and excites the surrounding air at frequencies inthe hearing
range, the resulting airwaves could be audible. This so-called structure-borne noise
(usuallyin the range of 16 250 Hz) can pose an additional nuisance to the occupants,
and is mostly associatedwith rail systems in tunnels or at-grade situations when rooms
face away from the tracks, so that no directairborne noise is perceived. ISO 14837
states that the assessment of ground-borne noise can be carried outin the form of
direct measurements using sound level meters or derived from ground-borne vibration.
Theadvantage of the latter is that only one type of sensor would be needed. Only
monitoring vibration levelsis less maintenance-intensive than also putting up a sound
level meter, and could ease evaluation at theend. Calculating noise levels from ground-
borne vibration only considers the sound radiated from walls and floors, while a
microphone also records internal sources (clattering, rattling) or possible direct noise
from(rail) traffic, which is not part of the ground-borne noise evaluation, Safety
Evaluation of Buildings in the Vicinity of Railway Tracks.
As per ISO 14837, typically, dominant frequencies are less than 100 Hz because they
represent the response of building elements. The frequency range relevant to the
evaluation of the risk of vibration-induced damage on building structures is 1 Hz to 500
Hz, although high strains associated with higher risk of damage are associated with
low frequencies. Most building damage from manmade sources occurs in the
frequency range 1 Hz to 100 Hz. This is an appropriate range for evaluating building
damage and peak particle velocity. A proposed safe level for "serious" structural
40
damage is very high: 50 mm/s peak particle velocity. Nevertheless, much lower levels
may be relevant for damage to old and historic buildings(as low as 2 mm/s), and for
more "minor" damage in ordinary building ("fine plaster cracking and reopening of old
cracks") [5]
Vibration norms for passengers ISO 2631
ISO-2631 (1997) provides some guidance to the health effects of vibration as it applies
to people in normal health who are regularly exposed to vibration. The referenced
standard provides a graph showing the recommended or preferred zone (See Figure
9). Vibration exposures below the zone indicate health issues that have not been
clearly documented and/or objectively observed. Exposures above the zone indicate
that health risks are likely.
41
3.9. Deliberations on Vibrations
The key factors of the vehicle / track system which determine ground vibration are
related to the track design and the maintenance of wheel and rail:
Design of the track, more precisely the properties of the track

mass/spring/damping system consisting of rail, pads, sleeper, ballast, slab,
embankment
Impact excitation from track discontinuities like switches & crossings and
insulation joints
Wheel / rail surface quality, roughness incl. corrugation, out-of-roundness,
dents, flats
Intensity of ground based noise and vibrations, are primarily dependent on track
structure, soil conditions and distance of such buildings from the railway track. It has to
be ensured that these vibration levels do not exceed the safety limits as prescribed in
ISO 14835 for which specific measures may need to be adopted while designing the
track structure.
Passengers are also subjected to the vibrations for which norms have been prescribed
by ISO 2631. It has been suggested by DMRC that only these norms be specified for
rolling stock manufacturers. This makes sense as the rolling stock manufacturers have
no control over ground vibrations emitting from Metro operations.
As per ISO 2631, weighted acceleration of 0.315 m/s2 is the permissible value for
passenger comfort when he is subjected to the vibrations of this intensity,
continuouslyfor 24 hours.
Committee recommends
Vibrations to be measured as per ISO 2631, weighted acceleration should be less than
0.315 m/s2
42
4.0 Emergency Evacuation System
4.1 Practices adopted in various metro systems in India and elsewhere along
with the underlying logic/reasons (at least 3 metros each in USA, Europe,
Emergency doors are provided for evacuation during emergencies. Two types of
evacuation systems are provide in Metros world wide:
Front Evacuation System

For emergency egress, following 3 situations are possible -
Sliding door concept : This allows train to train & train to track detrainment, in
this concept you have a emergency door which slides sideways & ramp can be
deployed to track or a passage to other train can be provided, it is mainly useful
where no side passage is available
Top opening door concept: In this concept evacuation door opens upwards on
hinges & ramp is deployed to tracks, no train to train detrainment is possible
with this.
No front detrainment door: If infrastructure is provided with side walkways &

train has adequate level of redundancy it is extremely unlikely that train can not
be driven to next station for evacuation, that is to say it could be interesting not
to provide evacuation door at all on the trains with ATO or with driver
Systems followed world-wide by different Metros
Sl.No. Name of Metro Evacuation system

1 London Metro Front
2 Paris Metro Front
3 Germany Front
4 Washington Metro Front
5 Singapore Front
6 Dubai Front
7 China Front
8 Bangkok Front
43
Singapore Metro
Front Evacuation
Travellers on the London Underground know well how cramped trains can be. So fitting
a system for passenger evacuation required DCA to come up with a design that
combines space saving features with fast deployment.
The detrainment system designed for Bombardier are fitted to new S-Stock trains on
the Metropolitan Line. DCA says: Human factors played an important role in the
design of the escape system. Deployment has been made easy by the development of
a novel strap insertion and retention detail and by maintaining a total mass of just 15kg
for the ladder part of the system. A further complication that has been resolved was the
need to provide a lightweight interlocking bridge plate that allows the ladder to clear the
auto coupler for train-to-track egress as well as being used on its own for train-to-train
evacuation.
In pre-launch trials, deployment took under one minute and passengers escaped from
the train at a rate of one every two seconds.
44
London Metro
Shanghai Metro Front Evacuation
New York Metro Front Evacuation
45
4.2 Systems adopted by different Metros in India
Sl.No. Name of Metro Evacuation system

1 Delhi Metro Front
2 Bangalore Metro Side Evacuation
3 Chennai Metro Side evacuation
4 Kolkata Metro IR Front
6 L&T HMR Front
A walkway is provided along the track. People get out through normal doors and move
on the walkway which takes them to the nearest station platform. The relative merits
and demerits of this system are as follows:
Advantages:
In case of DC third rail system evacuation is faster as switching off of power to

third rail is not required.
Evacuation from the train is faster due to large number of doors.
Disadvantages:
In case of sharp curves,side evacuation is not considered safe as gap between

train and walkway on curve will be very large, which have to be bridged by some
plate/footboard
Side evacuation requires side walkway and hence via-duct width is
unnecessarily more and structures are heavy due to extra loading
Walking on raised walkway is not considered safe for children/elderly
passengers
Front Evacuation system
Advantages:
No need for extra walkway, hence size of the tunnel as well as via-duct reduces
thus is more economical.
Evacuation is from emergency doors provided at the ends and can be better
regulated by motorman and stampede is prevented.
Walking is easier for passengers in this system as either they have to walk
through the coaches or on the track
46
Disadvantages
Power block is necessary in case of 750 Volts DC third Rail system, which may
take some time
Exit from single emergency door may affect the faster evacuation.
4.3 Recommendations
There have been instances of emergency evacuation in Kolkata Metro in its operation
during the last 25 years, but no major difficulty was faced in evacuation even though
system operates on 750 volts DC third rail and power has to be switched off before
opening of the emergency door.
Committee thus strongly recommends that Indian Metros should adopt front evacuation
only, with door at center as is also the most prevalent practice world-wide.
47
48
5.0 Coupling arrangement (Automatic, semi-automatic etc.)
5.1 Type of Couplers

There are different types of coupler head designs available, usually the types
are determined by existing fleet or rescue locomotives etc. for new metro
system usually the couplers are from Schafenberg family of couplers. These
are of following types:
Automatic Mechanical, Pneumatic and Electrical coupler
Automatic mechanical and pneumatic coupling and Jumper cables for

electrical connection.
Semi-Permanent coupler. Electrical coupling is through jumper cables

between cars.
Suppliers for Indian Metros and costs
Suppliers are:
Voith Turbo, Germany RS1,RS3 and BMRCL
Dellner, Sweden RS2
Faiveley Chennai Metro
Dellnerand Voithhave set up subsidiary units in India for local manufacturing.

Voith couplers are of Scharfenberg (Schaku) type. The Dellner and Faiveley
couplers are also of similar type. Faiveley is also manufacturing couplers in India.
The design of the couplers depends on the type of coupler head, amount of
energy absorption required, coupling range, etc.
Cost Aspects
Semi Permanent Rs 2.5 to Rs 3.0 Lakh
Automatic mechanical & pneumatic coupler Rs 10 Lakhs
Automatic mechanical, electrical & pneumatic coupler Rs 20 Lakhs
49
The coupling arrangement in the various Indian metros is brought out below:
Project Ends of rake / train Between Between two basic

formation cars in units
basic unit
DMRC RS1 Automatic mechanical Semi- Automatic mechanical,
& pneumatic permanent pneumatic & electrical
Jaipur Automatic mechanical Semi- Automatic mechanical,
metro & pneumatic permanent pneumatic & electrical
Bangalore Automatic mechanical Semi-
metro-3 car & pneumatic permanent
Hyderabad Automatic mechanical Semi-
metro- 3 & pneumatic permanent
car
Kolkata Automatic mechanical Semi- Automatic mechanical,
metro E-W & pneumatic permanent pneumatic, jumper
6 car cables for electrical
DMRC Automatic mechanical Semi- Automatic mechanical,
RS10 & pneumatic permanent pneumatic & electrical
5.2 Functional Requirement of couplers
The coupling arrangement is dependent on operating needs:
1. Full automatic front coupler with electrical & pneumatic head : These couplers
are required where quick connect / disconnect is required, for example EMU
trains for which one regularly couples & decouples the train to form different
train configurations. On Indian Metros configuration is very rarely changed.
Most of the metros run in fixed formation i.e. 4 car,6 car or 8 car. Hence is not
50
required for Indian Metros and in such cases even semi permanent couplers
can be provided between two basic units
2. Between coaches which are not expected to be decoupled often, semi-

permanent coupler are preferred design.
3. Two rakes need to be coupled in the rescue mode, here time is a

consideration, hence automatic mechanical and pneumatic coupling at the
two end of the rakes are recommended.
4. Besides the load key criterion for couplers is their recoverable stroke
capability, and usually for metro train of fixed train configuration it should not
exceed 10 km/h, that is to say coupler should not be requested to absorb
collision energy in excess of 10 km/h
5.3 Recommendations for Coupling Arrangement:

1. For two ends of the train: Automatic Couplers without electric head.Electric
coupling shall be through jumper cables. Two rakes need to be coupled in
the rescue mode, here time is a consideration, hence automatic mechanical
and pneumatic coupling at the two end of the rakes are recommended.
2. Between two basic units: In case frequent interchanging of basic units or

changes in car formations are required, Automatic Mechanical, Pneumatic
and Electrical coupler may be provided. DMRC is providing these Automatic
couplers between basic units. As these couplers are most expensive
(Approximately 4 times the cost of semi-permanent coupler). Hence usage
should be only need based.
3. Between cars of the same basic unit: Semi-Permanent Couplersand jumper

cables for electrical
51
6.0 Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rake, Power to weight ratio/ % motorization
6.1 Percentage Motorisation
Effect on Run Time with varying percentage of Motorisation
Metros that have adopted 66% Motorisation are KMRCL Metro and Bangalore Metro
with:
Basic configuration 1 DTC and two MC
TM continuous rating 180 KW
Rake consists of 3 car, 6 cars or 9 cars
In 6 car consist Total Traction Motors 16 Total 2880 KW
DMRC adopted 50% motorization for Phase 1 and Phase 2 with:
TM continuous rating 240 KW
General configuration 2 Car basic unit 1MC and 1 TC
Rake consists of 4 cars, 6 cars or 8 cars
In 6 car consist Total Traction Motors 12 Total2880 KW
6.2 Typical Operational parameters for a 6 car rake with 50% powering
Sl. Item Description Typical Remarks

No. Values
1 Tare weight of 246 tons
Train
2 Weight AW3 380 tons 380 persons per coach @
8 persons per sq meter
3 Adhesion 0.18 Typical
4 Maximum tractive 342 KN 0.18*380*0.5*10 KN
effort
5 Starting Resistance 19 KN @500 Kg/ton on level
track
6 Net starting 323 KN
Tractive effort
7 Maximum starting 0.85 m/s2 305/380
acceleration
8 KW rating of Motor 240 KW Typical used by DMRC etc
9 Total Power per 2880 KW 240*12
rake
10 Power with one pair 2400 KW Bogie control
motors out
11 Power with two 1920 KW
pairs cut out
With 66% Powering
Sl. Item Description Typical Remarks

No. Values
1 Tare weight of 246 tons
Train
2 Weight AW3 380 tons 380 persons per coach @
8 persons per sq meter
3 Adhesion 0.18 Typical
4 Maximum tractive 451 KN 0.18*380*0.66*10 KN
effort possible
5 Starting Resistance 19 KN @500 Kg/ton on level
track
6 Net starting 432 KN 27 KN per motor
Tractive effort
7 Maximum starting 1.13 m/s2 432/380
acceleration
8 KW rating of Motor 180 KW Typical proposed by CAF
etc
9 Total Power per 2880 KW 180*16
rake
10 Power with one 2160 KW 180*12
coach cut out
11 Starting Tractive 324 KN Starting acceleration
effort with one =0.85 m/s2
coach cut out
12 Power with two 1440 KW 180*8
coach cut out
Starting tractive 216 KN Starting acceleration =
effort with two 0.56 m/s2
coach cut out
6.3 Time Saving Calculations
Typical section KMRCL
Total Distance 14.2 Km
Loading AW4
Number of halts 11 of 30 seconds each
Coasting 8% of allout run time
Average station distance 1290 meter
Assuming level grade
Time required with 66% motoring (180 KW X16) 21.7 minutes
Time required with 50% motoring (220 KWX12) 22.1 minutes
As per actual simulation done by Mitsubishi
Time required in all out mode with 66% powering (180 KWX16) 22.9 minutes
Allout mode with 50% powering(180 KWX12) 23.6
Time savings with higher initial acceleration is very marginal around 1.5% For both 50%
and 67% motorization, the schedule speed in normal mode is almost the same. The
acceleration levels are higher in 67% motorization which will be helpful in routes with
frequent gradients. Scheduled speed with both 50% powering and 67% powering is
given in the table below:
Characteristic DMRC Chennai Jaipur KMRCL BMRCL RMGL

RS3 25 KV AC 25 KV 750 750
25 KV AC VDC VDC
AC
Powering 50% 50% 50% 66% 66% 66%
Average 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0
acceleration from 0
to 30 kmph in m/s2
Instantaneous 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0
deceleration from
80 to 0 kmph in
m/s2
Average emergency 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3
deceleration in m/s2
Jerk rate in m/s3 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.75 0.7 0.75
Schedule speed 34 34 34 34 33 34
(normal mode) in
kmph
6.4 Savings in Regenerative braking
The major advantage of 67% motorization is that more amount of regenerative energy
will be available, thereby reducing the net energy consumption for traction.
Normally regenerated energy is around 30% of the energy consumed during motoring.
Regenerated energy with 67% motoring will go up by around 12 to 13% i.e. regenerated
energy will increase from 30% to 34%.
Typical Values of Energy consumption in Motoring and Regeneration(Traction energy

only) in case of 25 KV AC system with 50% powering in case of DMRC and 66
powering in case of KMRCL as per simulation studies are given below:
DMRC 4 Car train
DMRC Consumption figures of July 2010 BT rakes
KM earned 109593
Consumption motoring 1954073 KWH
Regeneration 777691 KWH
Motoring Consumption per km(4 cars@63 tons per car) 17.82 KWH or 70 watts/ton.km
Regeneration per km( 4cars) 7.1 KWH or 28.9 watts/ton.km
Net energy consumption 10.72 KWH or 42.5 watts/ton.km

With 67% powering regeneration will go up by 15% ie to 33.2 watts/ton km
Net energy consumption would be 36.75 watt/ton.km ie reduction by 4.3 watts/ton.km.
Presuming that there will be no increase in energy consumption during motoring on
account of additional motor coach and higher acceleration.
6.5 Simulation results by Mitsubishi for KMRCL 750 Volts third rail system with
67% powering
Sl Item DMRC figures as per DMRC KMRCL 750 V

.No recorded figures of figures as Third Rail
July 2010 on BT per figures as per
rakes recorded simulation by
figures of Mitsubishi with
July 2010 67% powering
on MC
rakes
1 Weight of 252 tonne(4 car) 252 tonne 380 tonne (6
train(loaded car)
condition)
2 Energy 70 watts 53.88 watts 51.2 watts
consumption
Motoring per.tonne
km
3 Regeneration per 28.9 watts (41%) 23.68 watts 32 watts
tonne.km (43.9%) (62.5%)
4 Net energy 42.5 watts 30.2 watts 19.2 watts
consumption per
tonne.km
5 Regeneration with 33.2 watts (47%) 27.2 watts 32 watts
67% powering (50%) (62.5%)
expected
6 Net energy 36.75 watts 26.68 watts 19.2 watts
consumption with
67% powering
excluding auxiliary
load
Life cycle energy cost for additional 1 watt hour per tonne.km consumption presuming a
life of 35 years and 150,000 kms per year @ Rs 5 per unit works out to
(5X35X150000X63/1000) Rs 16.5 lakh per car. This cost needs to be taken into
consideration while deciding the mode of traction and percentage powering
Motorisation
3 Car unit
For a basic 3 -car train there is no alternative but to have 66% motorization so as to
ensure that failure of one motor car does not result in immobilization of train in the
section.
4 Car unit/8 car trains
In case of 4-car/ 8 car trains, only 50% and 75% motorisation is possible. DMRC
who have sufficient experience with 50% recommends 75% motorization both for 4
car and 8 car trains. 75% motorisation in 4 car rakes would require three different
type of cars. It is thus desirable to go in for 75% motorisation in case of 8 car rakes
and 50% for 4 car rakes.
6 car/9 car trains
In case of 6 car/9car 66% motorization is a better option on account of following

considerations:
Advantages
Even with loss of one power car the operational performance is satisfactory,
hence motor coach control can be adopted instead of bogie control.
Smaller Traction Motor
Higher level of acceleration and declaration is possible, subject to adhesion

limits.
Higher regeneration level is achieved resulting in lower application of friction

Energy efficiency is better
Chances of slip/slide even under the worst conditions are reduced due to
utilization of lower adhesion factor compared to the permissible values.
Disadvantages
Number of motor coaches will go up which will also result in increase in cost,
and increase in tare weight. There will however be some reduction on
account of bogie control in cost of propulsion equipment
Number of pantographs in 25 KV AC system will go up. This can however be
reduced by having one common transformer and single panto for a 3 car
basic unit. This will reduce redundancy as two motor coaches will be out in
case of failures of traction transformer and is acceptable only for 6 car rake.
The initial & maintenance cost of propulsion for 67% motorization will be higher,
however there will be savings towards energy cost
Recommendations
Committee recommends 3 car or 6car per rake depending on the traffic projections with
66% motorization should be adopted as the standard for all future Metros. In case of 3
car rakes both motored cars should have independent propulsion equipment for
complete redundancy
6.6 Recommended Operating characteristics are as given below
Characteristic 50% Powering 66% Powering

Maximum Design speed 95kmph 95 kmph
Maximum operating speed 85kmph 85kmph
Average acceleration from 0 to 40 kmph 0.8 1.0
in m/s2 for fully loaded train at level track
with AW3 load standees 80/m2 and
seating approx. 50 p/car
Service braking rate from 80 kmph to 1.0 1.0 m/s2

standstill up to fully loaded train on level
tangent track
Emergency braking rate from 80 kmph to 1.3 1.3 m/s2
tangent track
Maximum jerk rate in acceleration or 0.7 0.7
braking in m/s3
Minimum Adhesion level 0.20 0.20
7.0 Propulsion Single source or consortium/JV approach.
7.1 Issue is whether bids be invited from Coach manufacturers as single source or
consortiums/JV of coach manufacturers and Propulsion equipment supplier.
Rolling stock manufacture involves four distinct requirements, namely:
i) Car body/mechanicals,
ii) train system design & integration,
iii) Propulsion system including TCMS and
iv) Interfacing, testing & commissioning with full MRTS system.
The above role is normally divided amongst two different set of firms
1. Car manufacturers
They specialize in manufacture of car body/mechanicals and integration of
propulsion system and TCMS from the specialist suppliers.
Examples are BEML, CAF, ROTEM
2. Propulsion Equipment suppliers

Propulsion system comprises of Traction Motor, main converter-inverters,
auxiliary converters, transformers & TCMS. The propulsion system is quite
crucial sub-system of the train. Responsibilities of propulsion system supplier
include:
Interfacing with other subsystems like HVAC, Lighting, Doors, ATC/ATO,
Brake System, Signaling, Passenger Information system, Power supply etc.
They supply propulsion equipment including TCMS who also carry out
interfacing, testing & commissioning with MRTS system.
Examples are Toshiba, MELCO, Hitachi, SIEMENS, Bombardier etc.
There are suppliers who supply the complete rolling stock including propulsion system.
Examples are Bombardier, SIEMENS, ALSTOM, Ansaldo Breda etc.
7.2 Views by the Industry representatives
ALSTOM
Bids must be invited from JVs/Consortiums, wherein suppliers of each of the four
requirements must be part of the consortium, and share joint and several
responsibilities.
SIEMENS
The propulsion system supplier shall be allowed to bid as consortium member and also
as sub-contractor to rolling stock supplier
Bombardier
A Consortium approach is recommended as it ensures that propulsion system supplier

is committed to contractual obligations. Non consortium approach may allow car
manufacturers(who do not manufacture propulsion equipment) to have enough
negotiating power post contract.
7.3 Views of Metros
BEML
Propulsion system supplier can be a sub-contractor or member of consortium member.

Both approaches are acceptable, in case subcontractor approach is followed, the role of
propulsion equipment supplier should be clearly defined.
CMRCL
Propulsion from single source is preferred.
DMRC
Propulsion equipment manufacturer can be a sub contractor or JV/consortium partner

with rolling stock manufacturer. Propulsion equipment supplier itself however should be
a supplier of main converter /inverter and traction motor.
Hyderabad Metro
Has Propulsion equipment supplier as sub-contractor and not a consortium member
RMGL
Propulsion system supplier need not be a consortium partner
The majority view is in favor of having propulsion equipment supplier as a sub-

contractor and not as a consortium partner with rolling stock manufacturer. For example
Rolling stock manufacturers BEML or Hyundai Rotem could bid as a single source with
options to source propulsion equipment from any of the suppliers eg Toshiba, Siemens,
Bombardier or MELCO as a subcontractor. ALSTOM is the only exception
recommending consortium approach. It is mentioned here that Siemens and
Bombardier also supply its propulsion equipment to other rolling stock manufacturers,
besides supplying complete rolling stock, hence their views partly reflect their business
interests.
Advantages of Non consortium approach.ie when propulsion equipment suppliers can

be a sub contractors.
Enables competitive pricing as

Rolling Stock manufacture that manufacture their own propulsion
equipment can offer better competitive price
Rolling stock manufacturers (who do not manufacture propulsion
equipment) will have enough negotiating power with Propulsion
equipment suppliers. This will reduce the price.
As the number of Propulsion equipment manufacturers are limited,
consortium approach will restrict the number of bids to number of
propulsion equipment manufacturers and thus competition.
7.4 Recommendations
Recommendations
Committee recommends that car manufacturers can either bid as a single vendor with
their own propulsion equipment in case it is manufactured by them and will have an
option to source the propulsion equipment from any propulsion equipment supplier as a
sub contractor. There should be no compulsion on the car manufacturer to have
propulsion equipment supplier as a consortium/JV partner for bidding as consortium.
Car manufacturer will have the option to bid as a single vendor or in consortium with
propulsion manufacturer
8.0 Eligibility/qualification criteria for procurement
Eligibility criteria should aim at encouraging competition, Ensure reliability and quality
and indigenization. Eligibility criteria has a direct bearing on the cost. Broader criteria
ensures more competition and competitive prices.
Rolling stock comprises of Car body and Propulsion equipment. As there are two
distinct set of suppliers for Car body manufacturing and propulsion equipment, and sub-
contractor approach for propulsion equipment supplier is recommended. It is necessary
to have separate eligibility/qualification criteria for these two separate set of suppliers.
Car body manufacturers include

1. CAF
2. BEML
3. CNR
4. CSR
5. Hyundai Rottem
6. Bombardier
7. ALSTOM
8. SIEMENS
Propulsion equipment suppliers are
1. Bombardier
2. Siemens
3. Alstom
4. Toshiba
5. Mitsubishi
6. Hitachi
7. ABB
8.1 Views of Industry
SIEMENS Views
For both Car Manufacturer and Propulsion equipment supplier
Bidder/Cons members, individually or jointly as a member of other Consortia/Joint

Venture or as sub-contractor to it's parent company have experience of and carried out
Vehicle Design, Interface (with other designated Contractors such as signaling, Track,
Traction etc.), Assembly & Supply, Testing and Commissioning of
1. Minimum of total 300 metro (i.e. MRT,LRT,Sub-urban Railways or high speed
railways) cars (out of which minimum 200 cars shall be of either Stainless Steel
or Aluminum).
2. Service Experience 50% of 300 must have compl;eted satisfactory revenue
operations for 5 years
3. No of contracts Minimum three.
4. Country Experience Three different countries or 5 years in India
BOMBARDIER
Eligibility criteria should focus on in-house Design capability, Vehicle Integration

experience and Service provenessin different environment and should specified for
each of the following critical components a) carboy b) bogies c) Propulsion Systems &
4) Vehicle Integration. These capabilities be demonstrated through;
1. Country experience Minimum two to three countries

2. Period of Satisfactory service 5 years
3. Bids by 100% Indian subsidiaries be permitted.
ALSTOM
Bidders must have proven capabilities
a) Train system design &integration

b) Car body mechanicals
c) Propulsion system including TCMS
d) Interfacing, testing and commissioning with full MRTS operation.
Indian subsidiary companies who have through parent company global experience be
eligible to bid on the basis of the global credentials of parent company. This will help in
cutting cost and indigenization. Credentials be proved through
1. Period of Satisfactory service 10 years of the parent company

2. No. of cars supplied Parent company experience
3. Bid by consortium with propulsion equipment manufacturer.
4. Country experience Multiple countries of Parent global company
BEML
The Applicant or Consortium / JV or its members individually or jointly as member of

other Consortia in their respective roles carried out design, manufacture, supply, testing,
commissioning & Integration of a minimum of 200 nos of stainless steel cars with similar
features including traction propulsion system,
JVs of reputed propulsion equipment manufacturer and Indian companies are allowed
to ensure transfer of latest technology and indigenous manufacturer in the country.
Qualification criteria should be as follows:
Minimum number of Cars 200 in last 10 years
Period of satisfactory service 50% of 200 must have completed 5 years or more
Country Experience In India or in a country other than the country of

manufacture
Projects executed through TOT arrangement with global player, be taken as experience
Views of Other Indian suppliers
1. Lead bidder must have experience in full RS integration, manufacture of trains,

car shells, bogies, propulsion etc.
2. Design should be proven design and coaches manufactured with that design be
in service for some time.
3. Indian subsidiaries of the main bidders who meets all the required qualification
criteria should be allowed to manufacture and supply 100% of the supplies
4. For sub-systems,similarly, the Indian owned subsidiaries of the suppliers who
qualify based on their references in their home country be allowed to
manufacture and supply 100% of the supplies.
8.2 Views based on experience of Indian Metros
BMRCL
Manufacturer of the propulsion system and other major sub-systems should have at
least 10 year experience in this field with at least 5 years outside its home country.
CMRCL
Have previously designed, manufactured, supplied, tested and commissioned for a

minimum of 200 cars with comparable features and of similar complexity in the
preceding 10 years. At least 50% of the 200 cars/carsets shall have been supplied and
proven in service for a period of 5 years or more in India, or, in a country other than the
country of manufacture
RMGL
Supplier should be necessarily a car builder and should have at least supplied 200 cars
running for a period of 3years without any major problem. The Propulsion equipment
supplier need not necessarily be a Consortium partner, but should have experience of
design and manufacture of minimum 200 nos. of Propulsion System with similar
features which should have been proven in service for a period of 3 years in a country
other than the country of origin of manufacturer
LTHMR
Propulsion supplier was decided on the basis of operational proven-ness for 10 years.
At least 4 years should have been in three different countries (it may be a consortium or
single source)
DMRC
Bidder consortium or its members, individually or jointly as member of other Consortia

Delivery Record of Metro cars in last 10 years
1. Minimum number of cars 300 metro (i.e. MRT,LRT, Sub-urban railway of high
speed railways out of which minimum 200 cars
shall be of either stain less steel or Aluminum
2. No of Contracts 5
3. No of countries Three countries
Operation Performance
150 cars out of above must be operating satisfactorily against three different contracts
in three countries for the last five years.
Propulsion System
Propulsion equipment supplier as a member of bidder consortium or a subcontractor to

the car manufacturer must have cumulative experience of minimum 10 years in the
Design and manufacturing of propulsion equipment (Traction converter-Inverter,
Auxiliary converter/Inverter and Traction Motor rolling stock. Propulsion equipment
supplied must have been in satisfactory revenue operation for at least five(5) years in
minimum 500 cars comprising of both powered and non-powered cars supplied against
minimum five different contracts in the Metros of minimum two different countries
outside the country of origin.
In case of JV/Consortium lead partner must have been a lead partner in at least two
rolling stock contracts against ICB in the last ten years.
8.3 Major Issues
Propulsion equipment suppliers are mainly Japanese and Europeans for example
MELCO, Hitachi, Toshiba, Bombardier, Alstom, Siemens, ABB. There is no indigenous
supplier of modern propulsion system. Some of the above major suppliers have started
manufacturing theseequipment in India through 100 % owned subsidiaries. Some
Japanese suppliers are also planning to set up joint venture companies in India with
Indian partners. All the above suppliers have enough experience of system integration
and have been supplying propulsion equipment to all major car manufacturers in
number of countries. Indian Metros and IR have also so far obtained propulsion
equipment only from above suppliers. Recently some Indian companies like Medha and
BHEL are trying to develop their own propulsion equipment for Mumbai suburban
system. All the above suppliers meet the following criteria for propulsion system:
No of Cars equipped Minimum 300
Minimum Cars in last 5 years Minimum 200
Country Experience At least one country other than the country of

manufacture or India
The above criterion has been proposed by most of the committee members
representing both Industry and also the Metros. Even 100% Indian subsidiaries of the
parent company and also their JV companies having majority stake with parent
company can be considered eligible with guaranteed support from parent company.
Barring Alstom most of the members are of the view that Propulsion equipment supplier
need not be a consortium partner and can also be a sub-contractor. It will not make any
difference to the Metros as most of the eligible propulsion equipment suppliers are
proven sources worldwide, but will give a wider choice to the car manufacturers and
likely to lead to more competitive prices.
Car Manufacturers
Present scenario
There are number of Metro car manufacturers in Europe, Korea and China. Some of
these have already supplied Metro cars to IR and have also set up or are setting up car
manufacturing units in India. Examples are Bombardier, Alstom, CAF Besides these
some Indian manufacturers have obtained TOT for coach manufacture from reputed car
manufacturers like BEML. ICF has also been manufacturing Metro coaches for Kolkata
Metro but these are conventional DC Metro cars. ICF does not have technology to
manufacture modern 3 phase Metros. There is a need to encourage European car
manufacturers to set up manufacturing facilities in India through technology transfer to
JVs with Indian coach manufacturers so that cost comes down.
8.4 Recommendations of the Committee
Eligibility criteria for car manufacturer must ensure quality, reliability and competitive
price of the rolling stock. Taking the views of Industry and Metros into consideration,
following eligibility criteria for Rolling stock supplier is recommended.
Eligibility criteria for car manufacturer:

Bidder consortium or its members, individually or jointly as member of other consortium
1. Minimum number of cars 300 metro (i.e. MRT,LRT, Sub-urban railway or
high speed railways out of which minimum 200
cars shall be of either stain less steel or Aluminum
in the last 10 years.
2. No of countries At least one country other than the country of
3. Operation Performance 150 cars out of above must be operating
satisfactorily against more than one contract in at
least one country other than the country of
manufacture or in India for last 5 years.
4. Projects executed through TOT arrangement with global player may be taken as
experience. This will promote indigenization.
5. Indian subsidiary companies be eligible to bid on the basis of the global
Eligibility criteria for Propulsion Equipment Supplier:

Propulsion equipment supplier can be consortium member or a sub-contractor meeting
the following requirements:
a) Must have cumulative experience of minimum 10 years in the Design and
manufacturing of propulsion equipment (Traction converter-Inverter, Auxiliary
converter/Inverter and Traction Motor rolling stock).
b) Propulsion equipment supplied must have been in satisfactory revenue

operation for at least five(5) years in minimum 500 cars comprising of both
powered and non-powered cars supplied against minimum five different
contracts in the Metros of least one country other than the country of
c) Projects executed through TOT arrangement with global player may be

taken as experience. This will promote indigenization.
d) Indian subsidiary companies be eligible to bid on the basis of the global

9.0 Control & communication protocol common/published
9.1 TIMS or Train Integrated Management
Train integrated management system (TIMS) is a complete, integrated system

for the control and monitoring of the train-borne equipment. TIMS provides
control and monitoring, diagnostic and reporting of the train-borne equipment in
a redundant manner.
Train Control & Management (TCMS) is a subsystem of TIMS and controls and
monitors all train equipment.
The TIMS is designed for ease of fault diagnosis and maintenance.
Subsystems of the train utilize microprocessor-based control. The subsystems
are inter-linked via a communication data bus system for the monitoring, fault
data logging and for first line diagnostics of faults on board the train.
Communication is through the Train Bus (ARCNET) and Local bus (RS-485).
IEC 60571 is the International standard for TIMS hardware.
Present Scenario
All the Reputed rolling stock manufacturers have developed their own
Train Integrated Management Control System (TIMS) over the years.
Even though communication protocols are based on international
standards but achieving interoperability with subsystems of alternative
vendors is generally quite difficult
Support of the TIMS manufacturer is required for achieving integration.
Siemens
TCMS should be supplied by Propulsion equipment supplier only. No comments

have been given on use of propriety software.
Bombardier
TCMS is critical for train operations, reliability and safety. Train builders and
equipment suppliers use different solutions and protocols; normally supplier
specific hardware and common network solutions and protocols such as
MVB,CAN, Ethernet. Functional requirement only need to be given for providing
flexibility of solution.
The common standard for the TCMS is defined by IEC 61375 series of
standards.
BEML
MELCO TCMS uses ARCNET defined by ANSI / ATA 878.1.The interfacing with
different sub-systems is carried out by the TMS sub-contractor and the various
sub-system suppliers in co-ordination with the rolling stock contractor.
Train Control & Management system of M/s MELCO is presently based on

ARCNET technology (Standardized protocol defined by ANSIIATA878.1).
ARCNET is basically a Ladder type Train Bus. Advantages of ARCNET:
1. Highly reliable with stored and forward method.
2. Ensure real-time control command data both by packet division and
priority control.
3. Conformity of IEC62280-1 (Safety related communication in closed
transmission systems)
4. Twisted Copper cable for ARCNET is easy to use. considering
maintenance cost. cost performance & Redundancy.
5. Local bus communication is RS485 / RS422 defined by EIA (Electronics
Industries Association).
6. The interfacing with different sub-systems is carried out by the TMS sub-
contractor and the various sub-system suppliers in co-ordination with the
rolling stock contractor.
9.3 Views of Metros
LT HMR
The hardware systems deployed on modern rolling stock normally conform to

international standards and can be insisted upon
BMRCL
TCMS with ARCNET technology supplied by MELCO is using Token

passing. HDLC (High Level Data link Control) frame format for Train Bus
Communication between the Cars (One TMS CPU to other Car TMS
CPU).
For communication from TCMS -Subsystem it is based on RS485/RS422
protocol.
In IP technology with Ethernet back bone communication currently
CSMAlCD (Carrier Sense Multiple Access I Collision Detection) is being
used.
There is no problem to monitor different sub-systems of different sub-
suppliers; however it should be possible to meet the common protocol
between TCMS & respective sub-systems.
Also Transmission data flow in the network between TCMS & sub-
systems can be standardized, so that subsystem supplier of different
makes can meet the requirement of monitoring & control of the various
parameters through TCMS. Gradually sub-system supplier should adopt
IP technology.
As far as software is concerned, it is a vendor specific proprietary item
and during the Tendering stage, concerned contractors refused to share
the source code with BMRCL and subsequently this requirement was
modified.
DMRC
All the Reputed rolling stock manufacturers have developed their own Train
Integrated Management Control System (TIMS) over the years. Even though
communication protocols are based on international standards but achieving
interoperability with subsystems of alternative vendors is generally quite difficult
and support of the TIMS manufacturer is required for achieving integration.
The hardware systems deployed on modern rolling stock normally conform to

international standards and can be insisted upon.
CMRL
CMRL has MVB bus in both intra and inter vehicular communication. It is
preferred that WTB for train communication and MVB/CanOpen for inter-
vehicular be adopted for all train set.
9.4 Recommendations of the Committee
Conformity to IEC62280-1 (Safety related communication in closed transmission

systems)
The hardware systems deployed should conform to international standards.
There should be common open protocol between TCMS & respective sub-
systems.
Also Transmission data flow in the network between TCMS & sub-systems can
be standardized, so that subsystem supplier of different makes can meet the
requirement of monitoring & control of the various parameters through TCMS.
Gradually sub-system supplier should adopt IP technology.
10.0 Driver less control
10.1 Driverless Train Operation Main Features
Automatic departure and run from station to station, including automatic turn-
back
Door re-opening on train hold command
Remote start of stalled trains
control passenger doors
prevent person injuries between cars or between platform and train
ensure safe starting conditions
set in/set off operation
supervise the status of the train
10.2 Basic technical system requirements for driverless operation
Continuous, bi-directional communication between trackside / OCC and

trains (= CBTC system).
Platform Screen Doors, radar grid or optical obstacle detection systems for
sealing the guide way in the platform areas and along the alignment in case
of elevated systems.
Highly reliable Rolling Stock sub-systems.
Obstacle detection equipment on bogies
Derailment detection on bogie axles.
Door nip protection equipment on all train doors.
Complete CCTV coverage on trains and two-way passenger help points.
Onboard fire, smoke and temperature detection equipment in passenger
compartments and inside the equipment cabinets.
Views of LT HMR
Hyderabad Metro evaluated about driverless system but in absence of CBTC

system decision, this decision could not be taken (driverless system requires
CBTC).
Hyderabad Metro operation/signaling concept is STO Semi-automated Train

Operation where
train runs automatically from station to station
automatic stop and door opening
train operated by a driver supported by ATO
driverless reversal to meet 90 seconds headway at terminal stations
Views of Siemens
It is recommended to have Driverless Trains as they enable shorter headways and cost
benefits for the operator over the project life cycle.
BMRCL
There is a need to adopt the communication based Train control (CBTC) system as a
matter of further up gradation of signalling system and subsequently Driverless train
operation can be adopted in phases
CMRL
Present design of RS is to operate it with driver, whose responsibility is to monitor the

passenger door in full ATO operation. However, Chennai may try driverless version in
the next phase.
DMRC
Rolling stock being procured for Phase-III project of DMRC (for Line-7 and Line-8)
against the tender RS10 will be suitable for operation in GoA3 and GoA4 modes i.e.
un-attendant train operation with attendant on board and without attendant on board
respectively
10.3 Recommendations
Driverless system is the technology, which is well proven now and is

strongly recommended for use in Indian Metro system.
Techno-Commercials considerations are in favour of driver-less system as

extra capex can be recovered in 7-10 years time.
Driverless system needs very high reliability and hence detailed
designs requires extra time in RAM assurance activities.
Approval and safety certificate from CRS due to lack of technical

experience, which can probably be managed.
Driver less operation is required to achieve 90 seconds frequency for full

utilization of Metro infrastructure capacity. This will require communication based
Train Control (CBTC) system."Driverless" Train Operation can be adopted in
phases with signaling up-gradation.
11.0 Indigenization
11.1 Indigenization objectives
Development of Indigenous industry for reducing dependence on imports

Reduction in import content and easy availability of spares
Reduction in rolling stock price.
11.2 Present Scenario
Coach manufacturing units
Standard clause in Metro Tenders mandates that the successful bidder will set up car
manufacturing unit in India and at least 70% of the quantity be produced indigenously.
This has led to setting up of following manufacturing units
BTcoach manufacturing unit at Vadodara

BEML Bangalore Development of facilities for Metro car production under TOT
from Hyundai Rotem
Kawasaki is also planning to set up coach production facilities in the country
These units are also sourcing their sub assembles from local industry example HVAC
units, transformers, Pantograph, internal furnishing material etc.
Private developers like GMRL, Reliance Metro,Mumbai, Airport Express and LTHMRL
have not imposed any condition for indigenous development and entire stock has been
procured from Hyundai-Rotem, South Korea and CSR, China.
BT
This needs detailed discussions with a view to ensure long-term Spare Parts & Service
availability during the lifetime of rolling stock. Unfortunately the indigenization
requirement is not very stringent in metro Tenders in India except a few tenders. Other
countries have utilized the mandatory localization concept effectively to develop the
local industry in terms of technology and quality through mandatory indigenization
criteria.
ALSTOM
Tender evaluation should consider landed cost at MRTS depot so that after considering
custom duties including countervailing duty (CVD), Cess on CVD and the Special
Additional duty (SAD) - to arrive at the total landed cost of the Rolling Stock at the
MRTS Depot. Landed cost of indigenous manufacture will then be cheaper, which
would act as incentive to indigenous manufacture. Lower cost of indigenous
maintenance spare would life cycle costs. This in turn will push many Global Companies
to set up local manufacturing facility under a separate locally incorporated company in
order to reduce costs.
A large number of reputed major train builders have set up manufacturing in India. In
the next phase, the emphasis should be on indigenization of propulsion system &TCMS
which, so far, has been trailing behind the localization curve.It would therefore, be
prudent to aggressively push for and support moves towards 100% indigenization and
indigenous procurement of the entire Rolling Stock, including Propulsion Systems.
This would also encourage more FDI to come in to India. The Government must must
initiate steps to ensure that investment of those manufacturers, who have invested
heavily in India in the form of manufacturing facilities, are well protected.
To promote indigenization it is proposed that:
I. A central Rolling Stock Procurement Agency that procures on behalf of all

Metros Authorities in the country be set up.
II. Big tenders of more than 250 cars should be contracted to more than one
supplier. Currently, many of the manufacturing facilities that were set up in
anticipation of obtaining orders are challenged with low off-take.
III. Similarly, awarding contracts on the existing supplier on single bid basis also
hampers competition & competitiveness and increase the cost. For example in
Jaipur Metro whereRS was awarded on single bid basis to BEML.
IV. There is a need to correct this situation by incentivizing procurement from firms
that have an installed manufacturing base in India. Tender Evaluation should be
based on the landed cost, inclusive of Taxes & Duties.
BEML
The specification requirement of metro cars is very stringent and based on established
international standards. The major constraintsrestrictingindigenizationare:
Technical know- how and know -why

Infrastructural facilities
Type and routine test facilities
Skilled trained manpower
Maintaining Quality to ensure high reliability & availability
Normally, Global Metro Manufacturers establish in-house infrastructure/ facilities for

manufacture of Carbody& Bogie frames, assembly, integration & testing. Major
aggregates are sourced from established limited global suppliers who have already
supplied to other Metros with satisfactory performance record.
Infrastructural facilities for manufacture of carbody and bogie frame and its integration
are already available in the country. Indigenous sources for certain outfitting items like
GFRP panels, grab poles & rails, window glasses, glass wool insulation, electrical
panels, battery box, stainless steel and aluminum fabricated items, etc are also
available.
For critical sub-systems like propulsion, brake, door, HVAC, passenger address &
Passenger information system, CCTV, gangway, bogie suspension, gearbox, etc there
are few established global suppliers with satisfactory performance record and they
should be encouraged to either set up their subsidiary in India or transfer technology to
an Indian company through JV. Certain items like wheel and axle may have to be
imported as present Indian manufacturers are having capacity constraints.
The specifications need to be standardized to increase the volumes. Presently, the

specifications are drafted on project to project basis. The major specifications which
require standardization are axle capacity, train formation including basic unit
composition, kinematic envelope, track parameters including minimum radius of
curvature, operating voltage, overhead or third rail current collection, etc.
Standardization will result in higher volumes, more vendors will show interest and the
cost will come down. Also, the cost towards design and type test can be amortised over
large number of cars.
DMRC
DMRC has followed the policy of encouraging indigenisation on consistent basis with
notable achievements by involving Indian contractors and manufacturers having
adequate experience to deliver quality products. Emphasis is made to promote transfer
of technology and suitable clauses have been included in the tender. This provides the
necessary stimulus and mandates the Rolling Stock (RS) contractors to associate with
suitable Indian companies for not only providing support during execution and the
warranty period but also for taking up manufacture of major sub-assemblies within India.
For procurement of high value Rolling Stock, specific provisions have been made in the
tender documents for manufacturing of a minimum specified number of train sets in
India with progressively increased indigenisation content by establishing the
manufacturing facilities either independently by the contractor or with an Indian partner.
Further, to facilitate ease in maintenance and availability of spares, the contractor is
bound by the contract conditions to ensure that the indigenisation of the specified items
is achieved either by setting up of the manufacturing facilities by the Principal foreign
supplier(s) of such items or by choosing a suitable Indian partner.
For achieving indigenisation of sub-systems, the rolling stock contractors can be

mandated with a contract condition to ensure that the indigenisation of the specified
items is achieved either by setting up the manufacturing facilities by the Principal foreign
supplier(s) or by choosing a suitable Indian partner. This would help in ensuring that
these firms remain abreast with the technological developments.
BMRCL
The quality of indigenized item must be of the same level as available internationally.
New product developed indigenously takes about 3 to 4 years for conducting field trials
undergoing cycles of failures and subsequent modifications before getting stabilized in
terms of performance and reliability for large scale adoption. This approach may be
feasible with IR having its own dedicated Design & development wing at RDSO but may
not be feasible for small Metros.
Metros have given the responsibility of development of local vendors to global suppliers
who have the responsibility of meeting global standards.
It has been possible to achieve about 31% indigenization on BMRCL project in rolling
stock. Details are as follows:
Car body manufacture fully indigenized

About 12 out-fitting items are outsourced from local vendors
Factory Acceptance test of the coaches, depot testing and commissioning is
done by BEML Engineers under the supervision of expatriate experts from Korea
and Japan.
Government can act as a catalyst by prescribing a certain level of indigenization in the

contract as mandatory. We can begin with 45 to 50% of contract value initially, which
can be later on increased with passage of time.
Indian railways
Car manufacture, integration and testing is done by ICF. Propulsion equipment is

procured through global bid and IR is also dependent on imports as there are no
indigenous sources for propulsion equipment including TCMS.For development of
Indigenous sources for 3 phase propulsion equipment, development orders have been
given to indigenous sources. Initiative can be taken by MOUD as is done by Ministry of
Railways for IR. This will help Indian firms acquire technology thorough collaborations
or indigenous development on their own.
11.4 Recommendations of the committee.
Rolling Stock manufacture includes

Manufacture of Car body& Bogie frames, assembly, integration & testing.
Infrastructural facilities for manufacture of car body and bogie frame and its
outfitting items like GFRP panels, grab poles & rails, window glasses, glass wool
insulation, electrical panels, battery box, stainless steel and aluminum fabricated
items, etc are also available.
manufacture of propulsion system including TCMS and other critical sub-systems
like propulsion, brake, door, HVAC, passenger address & Passenger information
system, CCTV etc.
Car manufacture
Indigenisation of Car body manufacture has already taken place as following
manufacturing facilities have already been set up:
BT coach manufacturing unit at Vadodara
BEML Bangalore under TOT from Hyundai Rotem
Kawasaki is also planning to set up coach production facilities.
ICF and RCF have facilities to manufacture EMU/MEMU coaches which can be
up graded to Metro coaches.
Above facilities can take care of the future Metro needs. There is however a need to
protect these investments and some incentives need to be given to these units for
effectively utilizing the facilities already created.
The critical area is indigenization of manufacture of propulsion system, TCMS and other
critical sub systems. Global suppliers with satisfactory performance record need to be
encouraged to either set up their subsidiary in India or transfer technology to an Indian
company through JV. Following steps are necessary to achieve this:
Specifications for both rolling stock and traction distribution system are standardized.
Standardization will result in higher volumes. It will be possible to leverage the bulk
procurement by a single agency to achieve development of indigenous industry through
TOT as has also been done by China.
Presently individual metros are procuring rolling stock in small quantities with different
specifications and clause to manufacture 60 to 70% cars indigenously. This does not
promote indigenisation of propulsion equipment which is mostly imported. As in case of
car body manufacture, indigenous manufacture of complete propulsion equipment in the
phased manner also needs to be mandated in the rolling stock tenders.
MOUD in order to promote indigenous manufacture of propulsion equipment should
give development orders for small quantities to local firms who can either develop on
their own or through collaboration with global suppliers. IR has adopted this approach
for development of indigenous three phase propulsion equipment for locomotive and
EMUs. After successful tests and trials these sources can be considered as regular
sources for propulsion equipment.
Committee, thus, recommends that a system of bulk order placement may be devised
preferably by MoUD by combining requirement of smaller metros. Orders should be
placed with at least 70% indigenization clause for both propulsion equipment and car
manufacture through TOT with indigenous manufacturers or setting up of Indian
subsidiary.
12.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Sl No. Details
1 Study of Noise assessment inside the Greater Cairo Underground Metro
ByMostafa E Aly
2 A study of Noise Levels associated with New York Citys Mass Transit
System by Richard Neitzel, Robyn R. M. Gershon and others
3 Athens Metro Extension Project to PiraeusGround borne Noise and

Vibration Assessmentand Control byKonstantinos E. Vogiatzis
4 Noise impact assessment of mass rapid transit systems in Delhi City

Naveen Garg, Omkar Sharma and S Maji. Acoustics, Ultrasonics, Shock and
Vibration Standard, National Physical Laboratory(CSIR) New Delhi 110012
5 Ministry of Environment and Forests Notification, New Delhi,the 9 th March

2009
6 METRO RAILWAY NOISE AND VIBRATION Causes and solutions for

DMRC Phase III
7 'Guidance on the provision of equipment and arrangements for evacuation

and escape from trains in an emergency London Metro
8 RIVASRailway Induced Vibration Abatement Solutions Collaborative project

State of the art review of mitigation measures on track
Project Coordinator: Bernd Asmussen International Union of Railways (UIC)
9 Being a good neighbour reducing vibrations near railway lines

Bernd AsmussenEnnoWiebe
RIVAS Project Coordinator, UIC Manager Research
Programmes and Projects, UIC
10 Article EuropeanRailwayReview_Vol.17issue6_2011
11 MD, Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. letter No. BMRCL/MD/PS/12-

13/038 dated 09.06.2012 to Secretary to Govt. of India
12 DMRC Train Noise Level Study RS1 by GC Report dated 7.06.2005
13 Interim guidelines for Assessment of noise from Tail infrastructure projects-

Published by Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW
5961 Goulburn Street, Sydney
Rolling Stock details of CMRL
Item No. Subject Value specified
1 Noise level Average

Condition Stationary Car
Noise Level
a. Interior
Drivers cab, car stationary 70 dBA
Noise Levels
Saloon 71 dBA
Condition Car Traveling at Full Speed
Drivers Cab - Rake operating in the open on dry, level, 75 dBA
tangent track at any speed up to 80 km/h in any normal
mode of acceleration, coasting,
or braking, with all auxiliaries operating under normal
conditions.
Saloon - Rake operating in the open on dry, level, 78 dBA
tangent track at any speed up to 80 km/h in any normal
mode of acceleration, coasting, or braking, with all
auxiliaries operating under normal conditions.
Condition Avg. Noise
Level
All systems operating simultaneously, including air 65 dBA at 15
conditioning and propulsion cooling system, rake m
stationary
b. Wayside Each auxiliary system operating alone, car stationary. 68 dBA at 5 m
Noise Levels Rake at any speed up to 30 km/h, maximum
acceleration or maximum full service brake with all 81 dBA at 15
auxiliaries operating under normal conditions. m
Rake between 30 km/h and 80 kmh,
maximum acceleration or maximum full service brake 82 dBA at 15
with all auxiliaries operating under normal conditions. m
All measurements shall be made in accordance with the following:
i. ISO 1683: Acoustics Preferred reference quantities for acoustic
Reference
levels;
specification
ii. EN ISO 3381 (2005): Acoustics Measurement of noise inside
railbound Vehicles and
iii. EN ISO 3095 (2005): Acoustics Measurement of noise emitted by

rail bound Vehicles.
Vibration Stationary car 2.0mm peak-to-peak amplitude for the frequency range from 1.4Hz to 20Hz,
and 0.8mm per second peak vibration velocity for the frequency range above
20Hz.
Ground borne To limit car introduced groundborne vibration induced in structures

Vibration neighboring the rail alignment to 70 dB
Vibration velocity levels are referenced to 1.0 mm/s2

2 Emergency Passengers alarm - One location on each side of the coach
evacuation
system Internal Emergency Egress Device - One passenger doorway on each side
of each car
External Emergency Passenger door Release Device - One passenger

doorway on each side of the car
Emergency ramp - procedure shall be displayed in the passenger

compartment
Controlled evacuation
Un controlled evacuation
3 Coupling The minimum operational unit shall be a 4-car rake, with semi-automatic
arrangement (between trains) and semi-permanent (within the train) couplings to form a
single rake with driver cars at each end of the rake.
4 Acceleration/ Item Metro Corridor

deceleration, Maximum Design Speed 90 km/h
rake powering
Maximum Operating Speed
80 km/h
Round Trip Schedule Speed w/ 30sec 34 km/h
station stop & 8% coasting excluding
terminal station turn around time
Acceleration from 0 to 30 km/h for fully

loaded train on level tangent track 0.82 m/s2 + 5%
Service braking rate from 80 kmph to 1.0 m/s2

tangent track
Emergency braking rate from 80 kmph to 1.3 m/s2

tangent track
Maximum jerk rate in acceleration or

braking 0.70 + 0.05 m/s3
Coefficient of adhesion (min.) but not 0.18
limited to
Rake Powering 50%

5 Qualification Service proven:
criteria
In general, service proven shall mean the system, subsystem, equipment or
components, etc. which have previously been designed, manufactured,
supplied, testing and commissioned for a minimum of 200 cars/carsets with
comparable features and of similar complexity in the preceding 10 years, At
least 50% of the 200 cars/carsets shall have been supplied and proven in
service for a period of 5 years or more in India, or, in a country other than the
country of manufacture
Car-body structure, bogie structure, seat frames, and equipment boxes shall
be designed for a service life of 30 years minimum in the Chennai
environment, based on an average annual operating distance of 150,000 km
per rake without requiring structural repair or replacement
6 Propulsion Propulsion equipment from single source could be preferred if it doesn't

equipment result in cost escalation.
7 TCMS CMRL has MVB bus in both intra and inter vehicular communication. It is
preferred that WTB for train communication and MVB/CanOpen for
inter-vehicuar be adopted for all train set.
8 Driverless Present design of RS is to operate it with driver, whose responsibility is to

train monitor the passenger door in full ATO operation. However, Chennai may try
driverless version in the next phase.
9 Indigenization The present contract allows the supplier to indigenize the train production.
Hence the supplier has set up a factory in a location close to Chennai.
Indigenization is promoted in non critical areas and 35-40% of the items
manufactured in the new factory is expected to be indigenous. Constraints in
indigenization are,
i. Difficulty in ensuring full transfer of technology

ii. Trained labor for specific skills
iii. New machinery and plant which will take time to give consistent
quality
iv. Ancillary units experienced in stainless steel / aluminium metal work
for car building to required standards.
v. Non-availability of material / car level advanced test facilities in
private sector in India
vi. Unavailability of metro traction propulsion manufacturers in India
Date: 13th February, 2013
NOTE
Sub: DMRCs comments on TOR for Sub-Committee on Rolling Stock
1. Item No. 1 Noise and Vibration Level (including RS, Track etc):
1.1 Recommended interior and exterior noise levels:
a. Interior and Exterior level, specified under stationery and running conditions on via-duct
as well as in tunnel for the existing rolling stock contracts (RS1, RS2 and RS3) is
indicated in the attached Annexure-I.
b. The specified interior and exterior noise levels in RS10 tender for procurement on
rolling stock for Phase-III Project of DMRC is also indicated in the Annexure-I.
1.2 It is clarified that for the rolling stock proposed to be procured for Phase-III Project of DMRC,
measurement of specified noise levels shall be in LPA5.
2. Item No. 2 Emergency Evacuation System:

2.1 Front evacuation directly on the track bed has been adopted in broad-gauge network of DMRC
(RS1 and RS2 stock)
2.2 Side evacuation through saloon doors to the side walk way has been adopted in Line-5 & Line-
6 of DMRC network (RS3 stock)
2.3 For the stock proposed to be procured for new lines under Phase-III project of DMRC (L7 &
L8), front evacuation has been planned.
3. Coupling arrangement (Automatic, Semi-automatic) etc.

3.1 Automatic couplers (with pneumatic head but without electrical head) has been adopted on
both ends.
3.2 Automatic couplers with electrical and pneumatic head is used between the units.
3.3 Semi-permanent couplers are used in a unit.
4. Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rake, Power to weight ratio/% motorisation

4.1 Performance parameters for rolling stock procured for Contract RS!, RS2 and RS3 is
adopted as per Annexure-II.
5. Eligibility/Qualification criteria for procurement:

5.1 The criteria for procurement depend on the type of rolling stock and the quantity of
procurement. The qualification criteria for procurement for RS10 tender is given in the
enclosed Annexure-III.
Annexure3 DMRC 1
6. Propulsion Single Source or consortium/JV approach:
6.1 For the rolling stock, proposed to be procured against RS10 tender to meet the requirement of
Phase-III project of DMRC, propulsion manufacturer can be either a member of the JV/
Consortium or a sub-contractor.
6.2 It is DMRCs considered view that single source/vendor for propulsion equipment (consisting of
main converter inverter and traction motor) is beneficial for realizing high reliability rolling stock.
It has been our experience that procurement of these items from different vendors results in
integration issues, thereby the lowering the reliability of the stock.
7. Control & Communication protocol Common/Published:

7.1 All the Reputed rolling stock manufacturers have developed their own Train Integrated
Management Control System (TIMS) over the years. Even though communication protocols are
based on international standards but achieving interoperability with subsystems of alternative
vendors is generally quite difficult and support of the TIMS manufacturer is required for
achieving integration.
7.2 The hardware systems deployed on modern rolling stock normally conform to international
standards and can be insisted upon.
8. Driverless Control:
8.1 Rolling stock being procured for Phase-III project of DMRC (for Line-7 and Line-8) against the
tender RS10 will be suitable for operation in GoA3 and GoA4 modes i.e. un-attendant train
operation with attendant on board and without attendant on board respectively.
9. Indigenisation:
9.1 DMRC has followed the policy of encouraging indigenisation on consistent basis with notable
achievements by involving Indian contractors and manufacturers having adequate experience
to deliver quality products. Emphasis is made to promote transfer of technology and suitable
clauses have been included in the tender. This provides the necessary stimulus and mandates
the Rolling Stock (RS) contractors to associate with suitable Indian companies for not only
providing support during execution and the warranty period but also for taking up manufacture
of major sub-assemblies within India. For procurement of high value Rolling Stock, specific
provisions have been made in the tender documents for manufacturing of a minimum specified
number of train sets in India with progressively increased indigenisation content by establishing
the manufacturing facilities either independently by the contractor or with an Indian partner.
Further, to facilitate ease in maintenance and availability of spares, the contractor is bound by
the contract conditions to ensure that the indigenisation of the specified items is achieved
Annexure3 DMRC 2
either by setting up of the manufacturing facilities by the Principal foreign supplier(s) of such
items or by choosing a suitable Indian partner.
9.2 For achieving indigenisation of sub-systems, the rolling stock contractors can be mandated
with a contract condition to ensure that the indigenisation of the specified items is achieved
either by setting up the manufacturing facilities by the Principal foreign supplier(s) or by
choosing a suitable Indian partner. This would help in ensuring that these firms remain abreast
with the technological developments.
(H.S. Anand)
DRS
Annexure3 DMRC 3
Annexure I
Interior Noise Levels
Name Tender Under Stationary Under running condition Remarks

of No. Condition (RS1 at 80 kmph, RS2
Metro & RS3 at 85 kmph
Viaduct Tunnel Viaduct Tunnel
RS1* Saloon 68dBA Not specified 72dBA 92dBA
Cab 68dBA Not specified 70dBA 92dBA
RS2** Saloon 68dBA 75dBA 72dBA Not specified
DMRC Cab 68dBA 72dBA 70dBA Not specified
RS3** Saloon 68dBA 75dBA 72dBA Not specified
Cab 68dBA 72dBA 70dBA Not specified
Exterior Noise Levels

of No. Condition (RS1 at 80 kmph, RS2
Metro & RS3 at 85 kmph
RS1* 61dBA 72dBA 80dBA Not specified
RS2** 67dBA Not specified 84dBA Not specified
DMRC RS3** 67dBA Not specified 84dBA Not specified
Door Operation Noise Level

of No. Condition (RS1 at 80 kmph, RS2 &
Metro RS3 at 85 kmph
RS1* Opening/ 72dBA Not specified Not Not
Closing applicable applicable
Unlocking/ Not Not specified Not Not
DMRC locking specified applicable applicable
RS2** Opening/ 72dBA Not specified Not Not
Unlocking/ 78dBA Not specified Not Not
locking applicable applicable
RS3** Opening/ 72dBA Not specified Not Not
Unlocking/ 78dBA Not specified Not Not
locking applicable applicable
* All values measured are LpAeq.5s A Weighted equivalent continuous sound pressure
level where the measurement time interval T is five
second (T=5s).
** All values measured are LpA5 After applying the time and frequency weighting, the
sampled measurement data of 20 seconds (10000
readings sampled with 500 Hz from one microphone) is
divided into classes corresponding to each level (e.g. 10
classes per dB). For each class the frequency over the
measurement time is calculated. A histogram of the
frequency of each LpAF level over the measurement time is
Annexure3 DMRC 4
made. This is then converted to a graph over cumulative
relative frequency. The value for 95% of the time is the
LpA5 level, i.e. the A weighted sound pressure level
exceeded for 5% of the measurement time period.
RS10
(a) Interior
Interior Noise Level (LpA5)
Location Interior Noise
(Section) Measurements in dBA
Stationary Running
50 Kmph
75 Kmph
Elevated
platform
Tunnel
at
Saloon 64 68 72 75
Driving Cab
63 68 68 70
(b) Exterior
Exterior Noise Level (LpA5)
Maximum Level of Exterior Noise in dBA

Elevated (measured in two track section)
and at-grade sections
Stationary Running at 75Kmph
67 82
Annexure3 DMRC 5
Annexure II
Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rate/Power to Weight Ratio/% Motorisation
Item RS1 RS2 RS3

Max. Speed 90 kmph (Design) 95 kmph (Design) 95 kmph (Design)
80 kmph (Operational) 85 kmph (Operational 85 kmph (Operational)
Starting Acceleration/ 0.82 m/s2 5% (Metro 0.82 m/s2 5% 0.80 m/s2 5%
Speed Range Corridor) (0-30 kmph) (0-30 kmph)
0.78 m/s2 5% (Rail
Corridor)
(0-30 kmph)
Service Braking/ 1m/s2 5% 1m/s2 5% 1m/s2 5%
Deceleration/Speed
Range
Emergency Braking 1.3m/s2 1.3m/s2 1.3m/s2
Rate
Maximum Jerk Rate in 0.7 0.05m/s3 0.7 0.05m/s3 0.7 0.05m/s3
acceleration or braking
Co-efficient of 0.18 0.18 0.18
Adhesion
Rake Powering 50% 50% 50%
Average speed Schedule Speed: Schedule Speed: Schedule Speed:

32 kmph (Metro corridor) 35 kmph 34 kmph
35 kmph (Rail corridor)
Power/Weight Ratio Tare: 149KN/Train Tare: 149 KN/Train
Full load: 234 KN/Train Full load:250KN/Train Full load: 227 KN/Train
(Above for 4-car train) (Above for 4-car train) (Above for 4-car train)
Average Inter Station 1.12 km(Line#3/Line#4) 1.12km(Line#3/Line#4) 1.291km
distances 1.28 km(Line#2) 1.28 km(Line#2) (Line#6)
Coupling arrangement adopted by various Metros
Metro For two ends of Between two Between Remarks

rake basic units coaches of same
basic unit
DMRC-RS1 Automatic without Automatic with Semi-permanent
electrical head electric head
Annexure3 DMRC 6
Annexure III
Eligibility/Qualification criteria for procurement:
1. Delivery Record
Has the Bidder/Consortium/Joint Venture or its members, individually or jointly as a member of

other Consortia/Joint Venture have experience of and carried out Vehicle Design, Interface
(with other designated Contractors such as signaling, Track, Traction etc.) Assembly & Supply,
Testing and Commissioning of minimum of total 300 metro (i.e. MRT, LRT, Sub-urban
Railways or high speed railways) cars (out of which minimum 200 cars shall be of either
Stainless Steel or Aluminium)
EITHER outside the country of origin in at least five(5) different contracts in MRT, LRT,
Sub-urban Railways or high speed railways of at least three(3) different countries
OR in India
In the last ten(10) years.
2. Operation Performance:
Out of 300 or more cars commissioned in accordance with above (1), have minimum of total
150 metro (i.e. MRT, LRT, Sub-urban Railways or high speed railways) cars completed
satisfactory revenue operation:
EITHER outside the country of origin in at least three(3) different contracts in MRT,
LRT, Sub-urban Railways or high speed railways of at least three(3) different countries
OR in India
for more than five(5) years.
3. Propulsion System
Does any Member of the Consortium/Joint Venture individually or its Parent company or its
group companies have cumulative experience of minimum ten(10) years in the Design and
Manufacturing of Propulsion Equipments (Traction Converter-Inverter, Auxiliary Converter
Inverter and Traction Motor) for Metro rolling stock AND do the propulsion equipments supplied
have been in satisfactory revenue operation for at least five(5) years in minimum aggregate
500 cars comprising of both powered and non-powered cars, supplied against minimum five(5)
different contracts in the Metros (i.e. MRT, LRT, Sub-urban Railways or high speed railways) of
minimum two(2) different countries outside the country of origin.
OR
Does the manufacturer of the Propulsion Equipment (Traction Converter Inverter, Auxiliary
Converter-Inverter and Traction Motor) proposed by the tenderer as a sub-contractor for supply
of the Propulsion Equipments against this tender, has minimum ten(10) years experience in the
field of Design and Manufacturing of the Propulsion Equipment AND do the Propulsion
Equipment Designed, Manufactured and Supplied by the said manufacturer have been in
satisfactory revenue operation for at least five(5) years in minimum aggregate 500 cars
comprising of both powered and non-powered cars, supplied against minimum five(5) different
contracts in the Metros (i.e. MRT, LRT, Sub-urban Railways and high speed railways) of
minimum two(2) different countries outside his country of origin.
4. Leader of the JV/Consortium

In case of a Joint Venture/Consortium, has the proposed leader of the Joint Venture/
Consortium for his project been a leader of any of the Joint Venture/Consortium in at least
two(2) Rolling Stock contracts awarded against ICB in the last ten(10) years.
Annexure3 DMRC 7
Hyderabad Metro - Submissions for Metro Railway Standardization
Sl. No Description LTMRHLs Response Remarks
1. Noise levels specified Inside Car & Cab: - 70 dB (A) as per

international standard ISO 3381.
a. Under stationary conditions under
the tunnel and on wire duct. Outside the train:-68 dB (A) as per
Door Operation Noise: - 72dBA

during the sliding operation and 78
dBA for the locking/unlocking
ii) Under moving conditions both inside Inside Car & Cab:-74 dB (A) as per
the tunnel and on wire duct. international standard ISO 3381.
Outside the train:-85 dB (A) as per

2. Emergency evacuation system:
b. System adopted by Hyderabad

c. For emergency evacuation in
Metro Rail for emergency Hyderabad Metro network, we
evacuation along with underlined have provided front end
logic reason. Study by HMR in this emergency door, which shall be
regard vis-a-vis elevated, able to detrain 2000 passengers
underground corridors may also be in 30 minutes. The main reasons
given. for this are as under as proposed
by Consultants:
d. a. 25KV traction system and
hence front evacuation is safe.
e. b. sharp curves of 120m and
hence side evacuation is not
considered safe as gap between
train and walkway on curve will
be very large, which have to be
bridged by some
plate/footboard.
f. c. side evacuation requires side
walkway and hence viaduct
width is un-necessarily more and
structures are heavy due to
extra loading.
g. d. walking on raised walkway is
not considered safe for
Annexure 4 LT HMR 1
children/elderly passengers.
3.h. Details of coupling arrangement

prescribed by LTMRHL
For two ends of the rake For two end, Automatic coupler
having mechanical and
pneumatic connection is
provided.
i. Between two basic units Between Two basic units,

Automatic coupler having
mechanical and pneumatic
connection is provided.
j. Between the coaches of the same Between the coach of the same
basic unit basic unit, Semi-permanent
coupler is provided.
Implication of various coupling

k. Design implication shall be such
arrangement that coupling shall be achieved
with the most adverse mismatch
of car heights, caused by wheel
wear, passenger loading, air
spring deflection, and service
tolerances.
l. The gathering range of the
mechanical coupler shall be
suitable for up to horizontal
curves of 100m radius and
vertical curves of 1500m radius.
4.m. Acceleration from 0 kmph to 30 1.0 m/s2 5%

kmph for AW4 loaded train on level
tangent track.
Deceleration from 80 kmph to 1.0 m/s2 10 % as per EN 13452-

standstill for AW4 loaded train on 2:2003
level tangent track
n. Jerk rate 2
0.70 m/s
Annexure 4 LT HMR 2
o. Power to weight ratio
p. Percentage motorization may be 66 %

given for rakes planned on LTMRHL.
q. Simulation report for merits of 66% Decision for 66 % traction power

power over 50% powering. per rake was made on the basis
of following:
a. higher acceleration
requirement considering,
Hyderabad metro
alignment (which have
sharp curves/gradients)
b. average speed
requirement (30kmph
and above)
c. higher regeneration with
66% powering
d. train clearing section and
going upto terminal in
degraded mode with one
motor coach failure
5r.& 6. Advantages/disadvantages of Propulsion supplier of LTMRHL

sourcing propulsion equipment from trains will be M/s Mitsubishi
single source vis--vis Electric, Japan, who is sub-
consortium/JV contractor of Hyundai Rotem
s. (not a consortium member).
Our selection criteria for

propulsion supplier was decided
on the basis of
operationalproven-ness for 10
years of which at least 4 years
should have been in three
different countries (it may be a
consortium or single source)
Annexure 4 LT HMR 3
7.t. Control and communication protocol Train integrated management
(TCMS) prescribed and used in rakes system (TIMS) is a complete,
running on Hyderabad Metro. integrated system for the
Suggestions and recommendations control and monitoring of the
of Hyderabad Metro in this regard. train-borne equipment. TIMS
u. provides control and monitoring,
diagnostic and reporting of the
train-borne equipment in a
redundant manner through the
Train Bus (ARCNET) and Local
bus (RS-485). The TIMS is
designed for ease of fault
diagnosis and maintenance.
TIMS controls and monitors all

non-safety critical systems and
shall monitor vital or safety
critical systems.
Subsystems of the train utilize

microprocessor-based control.
The subsystems are inter-linked
via a communication data bus
system for the monitoring, fault
data logging and for first line
diagnostics of faults on board
the train.
TIMS hardware system shall

conform to International
standard IEC 60571.
8. Suggestions of Hyderabad Metro on Hyderabad Metro

driverless train operation in Indian operation/signaling concept is
context. Data available with STO Semi-automated Train
Hyderabad Metro regarding Metros Operation where
having driverless train operation.
- train runs automatically
v.
from station to station
- automatic stop and door
opening
- train operated by a
driver supported by ATO
- driverless reversal to
meet 90 seconds
headway at terminal
stations
Annexure 4 LT HMR 4
Driverless Train Operation
Main Features
Driverless operation
- Automatic departure and

run from station to
station, including
automatic turn-back
- Door re-opening on train
hold command
- Remote start of stalled
trains
- control passenger doors

- prevent person injuries
between cars or between
platform and train
- ensure safe starting
conditions
- set in/set off operation
- supervise the status of the
train
Basic technical system

requirements for driverless
operation
- Continuous, bi-
directional
communication between
trackside / OCC and
trains (= CBTC system).
- Platform Screen Doors,
radar grid or optical
obstacle detection
systems for sealing the
guideway in the platform
areas and along the
alignment in case of
elevated systems.
- Highly reliable Rolling
Stock sub-systems.
- Obstacle detection
equipment on bogies.
- Derailment detection on
Annexure 4 LT HMR 5
bogie axles.
- Door nip protection
equipment on all train
doors.
- Complete CCTV coverage
on trains and two-way
passenger help points.
- Onboard fire, smoke and
temperature detection
equipment in passenger
compartments and inside
the equipment cabinets.
Driverless system on the Indian

Metro Projects
- Driverless system is the

technology, which is well
proven now and is
strongly recommended
for use in Indian Metro
system.
- Hyderabad Metro
evaluated about
driverless system but in
absence of CBTC system
decision, this decision
could not be taken
(driverless system
requires CBTC)
- Techno-Commercials
considerations are in
favour of driver-less
system as extra capex
can be recovered in 7-10
years time.
- Driverless system very
high reliability and hence
detailed designs requires
extra time in RAM
assurance activities.
- Approval and safety
certificate from CRS due
to lack of technical
experience, which can
probably be managed.
-
Annexure 4 LT HMR 6
9. Strategy for indigenous For LTMRHL, presently there is
development adopted by Hyderabad no indigenous development
Metro along with constraints imposed on Vendors for rolling
stock as the entire coaches are
procured from Hyundai-Rotem,
South Korea. However, the
indigenous equip can be used
provided proven-ness and RAM
requirements are met. The
Agreement with Govt calls for
stringent Key Performance
Indicator (KPI) and there are
associated penalties. This to
some extent restricts usage of
newly developed indigenous
equipment on the Project.
Annexure 4 LT HMR 7
Submissions by RMGL on TOR Items
Item No. 1
Noise levels specified:
i) Under stationary conditions on via duct
ii) Under moving conditions on via duct.
The above values may be given for noise inside the coach as well as external noise for rakes
procured by RMGL. Remarks may also be given for Noise and Vibration level (including RS,
track etc.) as per TOR.
Noise levels specified:
i) Under stationary conditions on via duct:
Internal Noise: 68dBA External Noise: 67dBA
During Door Operation: 72dBA, during Door Locking /Unlocking: 78dBA
ii) Under moving conditions on via duct.
Internal Noise: 72dBA External Noise: 82dBA
Vibration:
2.00mm Peak to peak amplitude for the frequency range from 1.4Hz to 20 Hz
0.8mmper second peak vibration velocity for the frequency range above 20Hz
Item no.2:
Emergency Evacuation System:
System adopted by RMGL for emergency evacuation along with underlined logic reason.
Experiences of BMRC in this regard vis-a-vis elevated, underground corridors may also be
given:
1. Energy evacuation on RMGL system is through the side door of the car nearest to the
driver.
2. The emergency evacuation of passengers in a metro train should meet the following
requirements:
Annexure 5 RMGL 1
a) As far as possible evacuation should be avoided in between the stations and
trains should be taken to the next station, if possible, where the evacuation is safe
and faster.
b) Passengers should be evacuated under the supervision and guidance of metro
staff to avoid stampede and injury to passengers.
c) The rate of evacuation should be fast as large no. of passenger in a train, which
may be high as high 2700 passengers in an 8-car train, are required be evacuated
in less than 60 min.
d) There should be no harm/injury to passenger while coming out of train on to the
walkway.
3. Generally there are two methods of evacuation: one through the ramp door at the
front end of each cab and the other from the side doors of the car. In the first method,
front ramp door is opened by the train operator, which on opening rests on the track.
In this method the passengers have to move on the track structure upto the next
station. The track design should be such as to provide a safe and smooth passage to
the passengers. The main advantage of this method is that evacuation is carried out in
orderly fashion with the assistance of driver and other helping staff. The main
drawbacks of this system are as follow:
a) The width of the ramp door is limited and rate of discharge of passengers is rather
slow. In case of 8-car train, with a fully loaded train, it will be a challenge to
disembark all the passengers in less than 60min.
b) The provision a ramp door in a centre of the cab implies that drivers seat would
be provided on the left hand side of the cab and provision of a wide glass on the
front of the cab, will not be possible, which certain metro authorities, prefer for
aesthetic reasons.
4. The second method is through a side door nearest to the drivers cab which can be
opened by the driver sitting in the cab in emergency situation. As the door is
sufficiently wide the evacuation rate is faster. In this case the passengers need to be
evacuated on a walkway on the viaduct/underground tunnel for movement upto the
next station. As the evacuation is permitted through only one door it is possible to
regulate the flow of passengers by the driver or assisting metro staff. However, this
method suffers from the following problems:
a) The width of the walkway may vary between 750-950 mm. There is a possibility
that the passengers may fall from the walkway due to pushing by the fellow
passengers in panic mode.
b) The gap between the door of the train and the walkway has to meet the K.E.
/Structure Gauge requirements. K.E. in-between sections has to be designed for
max. speed of the train along with other train movements due to various factors.
The gap between the car body and walkway in between the station, on a tangent
track is expected to be approx 275mm. On curves the gap will become wider to
take care of the mid/end throw of cars. With such a wide gap there is every
Annexure 5 RMGL 2
possibility that passenger may fall in-between the gap between the carbody and
walkway. In such a situation, it is required that a bridging device is fixed between
the carbody and walkway before the passengers are permitted to come out. This
device will be kept under the seat and will have to fixed by the railways staff
before the evacuation starts.
c) Walking on the walkway of limited width at the car floor level on the elevated
corridor, may be more difficult for the passengers than on the railway track in first
method.
5. DMRC uses both methods of evacuation through a front ramp door in (RS-1 and RS-
2 Contract) and side door in (RS-3 Contract). A comparative evaluation of both
methods of evacuation can be made through the mock drills in DMRC under
controlled conditions and safer of the two alternatives may be adopted for future
metro railways.
Item No.3:
Coupling Arrangement :
Details of coupling arrangement prescribed by RMGL :
(i) For two ends of the rake.
(ii) Between two basic units
(iii) Between the coaches of the same basic unit
Costs implications for various coupling arrangements may also be given:
Following type of coupler are used in RMGL trains.

1. For two ends of the train: Automatic Couplers without electric head.
2. Between two basic units: In RMGL system only one basic unit of 3 cars will be
operated. However automatic couplers need to be provided between the two basic
units. Automatic couplers are preferred in lieu of semi-permanent couplers as
coupling and coupling of the basic units during corrective/preventive maintenance
can be achieved automatically without manual operation.
3. Between cars of the same basic unit: Semi-Permanent Couplers.
Note: Automatic couplers at the ends of the trains may be slightly different from those in
between the basic units in respect of electric head of the coupler. The requirement of
electrical contacts on electric head on the automatic couplers at the end of the train is
significantly lower than those in between the basic units, resulting in cost reduction.
Costs implications for various coupling arrangements is not available currently with RMGL
Item No.4:
Annexure 5 RMGL 3
Acceleration/ Deceleration:
Values of acceleration/deceleration and jerk rate, power to weight ratio and percentage
motorization may be given for rakes procured by RMGL
Any analysis or simulation report for merits of 50% power over 66% powering.
Average acceleration from 0 to 30km/h : 1 m/s2 ( 5%)

Maximum Jerk : 0,7m/s ( 0, 05)
Adhesion limit : 16 %
Average service deceleration from 80 to 0 km/h : - 0.95 m/s2 ( 5%)
Instantaneous full service deceleration : 1.1 m/s2
Full service deceleration: 1.3m/s2
Maximum Jerk : 0,7m/s ( 0, 05)
Percentage motorization: 66% (1C2M configuration)
Power weight ratio: 14.59 W/Kg ( AW0 condition)
Based on the traffic forecast there is no requirement of increase in no. of cars/basic units in
future on RMGL system. No simulation analysis was carried out for 50% powering v/s 66%
powering. Further following comments are made:
For a basic 3 -car train there is no alternative but to have 66% motorization so as to
ensure that failure of one motor car does not result in immobilization of train in the
section.
In case, a basic 2-car train is required to be operated as a unit, 100% motorization is
required.
In case of 4-car train with 2 basic 2-cars units, 50% motorization appears to be a
preferred choice.
A 3-car unit with 66% motorization is a better option on account of following

considerations:
a. Even with loss of one power car the operational performance is satisfactory.
b. Higher level of acceleration and declaration is possible, subject to adhesion limits.
c. Higher regeneration level is achieved resulting in lower application of friction
d. Changes of slip/slide even under the worst conditions are reduced due to utilization of
lower adhesion factor compared to the permissible values.
However, in this configuration the train composition of 8-cars is not possible.
Item No. 5 and 6:

Eligibility/qualification criteria adopted by RMGL. Views of RMGL on
advantages/disadvantages of sourcing propulsion equipment from single source vis--vis
consortium/JV:
Annexure 5 RMGL 4
The eligibility/qualification criteria adopted by RMGL was as follows:
The Rolling Stock supplier should be a car builder.
The requirement of cars for RMGL project was 15 cars only. Initially there was
no response from the established Rolling Stock manufactures for supply of these
cars. Finally Consortium of Siemens AG, Germany and Siemens Limited, India
offered cars manufactured in the factory of Zhuzhou Electric Locomotive
Company Limited (ZELC), China to a design almost identical to the cars running
on Guangzhou Line-3 (GZL-3) in China. These cars were originally manufactured
to Siemens design in the Year 2005 under a technology transfer agreement. The
propulsion equipment was also of Siemens design.
However RMGLs views are that RS supplier should be necessarily a car builder
and should have at least supplied 200 cars running for a period of 3years without
any major problem. The Propulsion equipments supplier need not necessarily be a
Consortium partner, but should have experience of design and manufacture of
minimum 200 nos. of Propulsion System with similar features which should have
been proven in service for a period of 3 years in a country other than the country
of origin of manufacturer.
Propulsion equipments need not be generally procured from a single source but
the supplier must have sufficient experience and the equipment should have
proven record of satisfactory service in revenue operation as stated above.
However, it would be positively preferable if Propulsion equipment is procured
from the same manufacturer on a particular metro railway to reduce the spare
inventory and avoid training of staff in different designs of propulsion systems.
Item No. 07:
Control and communication protocol (TCMS) prescribed and used in rakes running
on Bangalore Metro. Suggestions and recommendations of Bangalore Metro in this
regard.
This query is not related to RMGL.
Item No. 08 :
Suggestions of RMGL on driverless train operation in Indian context. Data available
with RMGL regarding Metros having driverless train operation.
RMGL presently doesnt have its own experience of Driverless Train Operation (DTO)
or Unattended Train Operation (UTO).
In general, employment of DTO/ATO, technically, would require higher level of

redundancy, suitable means for remote monitoring, CCTV surveillance and rescue
operations, and provision of Platform Screen Doors/Gates at station platforms. At
the same time, DTO/UTO operation can provide more regular and predictable
Annexure 5 RMGL 5
runs, more uniform ride quality, flexible timetables, lower turnover times and
lower life cycle costs and this is also equally applicable in the Indian context.
Further, DMRC has planned DTO/UTO on Lines 7 and Line 8 in their Phase-3,
and their views on the subject would be useful.
**Unattended train operations on metro line, with no person aboard (UTO) were
in Kobe (Japan) in 1982, Lille (France) in 1983 and Vancouver (Canada) in 1985.
The Kobe and Lille systems were based on fixed-block technology whereas the
Vancouver system utilized CBTC technology. Other examples of UTO utilizing
CBTC technology would include, for example, Lyon Line D(1992), Paris Meteor
Line (1998), Kuala Lumpur (1998) and Singapore North-East Line (2003).
Examples of UTO based on fixed block technology would include Osaka (1982)
and Copenhagen Metro (2002).
**Based on reference IRSE NEWS | ISSUE 150 | NOVEMBER 2009
Item No. 09:

Strategy for indigenous development adopted by RMGL along with constraints. :
The holding of metro cars in RMGL system is rather small i.e.15 nos. in Phase-I.
Even after completion of Phase-II the holding is not likely to exceed 36 cars. With
such a small holding, there is no significant incentive to go in for indigenous
development of equipments/components in a big way. The local industry will
undertake indigenous development of equipments/spares only when the quantities
are significant. In view of above, it is considered that Major Metro Railways
with sufficient experience in operation and maintenance will be in a better
position to frame a suitable policy in this regard.
The reliability standards of the metro railways are, by necessity, very high as any
dislocation of services would cause adverse public reaction. The quality of the
indigenous products should therefore be as good as that of imported product. To
ensure this, it is essential that proper specifications of the products and testing
procedures are established before initiating the development process. It should
also be ensured that the proper manufacturing and testing facilities are available
with the supplier. The locally developed product will also need to be proved for
satisfactory performance in service for a specified period before clearance is
given for bulk application. The prospective suppliers should therefore be
identified through a rigorous process of inspection of the design and production
facilities of their works.
The main problem in this respect is that the Rolling Stock suppliers do not furnish
detailed technical specifications of the spares/equipments without a technology
transfer agreement with the local industry. The local industry would obviously not
invest money in local development of spare/equipments or go in for a technology
transfer arrangement unless there is a sizable order and there is a guarantee for
supply of the developed product for a certain period by the metro railway. There
will be only a few items which will have very large consumption to justify local
Annexure 5 RMGL 6
development. Summarizing indigenous development should be taken with caution
and after considering the various aspects, some of which have been stated above.
Annexure 5 RMGL 7
BT COMMENTS ITEMWISE
Item No. 1 Noise and Vibration level (including RS, Track etc.)
Terms of Reference
Study of the Environmental Laws in India and extracting the relevant
statutory requirements.
Study of noise and vibration criteria adopted by various metros in India
in their rolling stock and trackwork specifications.
Study of similar international regulations in other countries having vast
knowledge base in this field such as USA, Germany, Japan, Singapore
etc.
Study of regulations in other countries regarding protection of heritage
structures.
Analysis of above and recommendations for acceptable noise & vibration
criteria for rolling stock and track including suggestions for integrated
responsibilities or clarity of interface.
Report of above study.
For measurements we should always make reference to standard ISO 3095 indicating always
the last version (pr EN ISO 3095:2010). In that standard you will find details of the track
acoustics characteristics like rail roughness and track decay rates.
For interior noise we should use the standard ISO 3381 (which is in phase of rewriting it).
For typical values that we could propose:
- Exterior noise
o Constant speed 80 km/h -> 83 db(A) measured according to pr EN ISO 3095

(LpAeqTp)
o Standstill -> 68 dB(A) measured according to pr EN ISO 3095 (average of LpAeq

around the train)
- Interior noise
Annexure 6 Bombardier Transportation 1

o Constant speed 80 km/h -> 75 dB(A) measured according to ISO 3381 in
passengers area. 70 dB(A) in drivers cab. LpAeq according to ISO 3381
o Standstill -> 65 dB(A) according to ISO 3381
1. In viaducts, based on our experience, the noise increment to the above values is : + 4 dB
would be more suitable for exterior noise and +2 for interior noise.
2. For tunnels the differences could be too much different depending on the type of tunnel and
the its section, etc. So it is difficult to provide a suitable value. However for one project,
where we measured the values in tunnels the noise increment for a tunnel of double track,
ballasted was around +5 dB(A).
Item 2 Emergency Evacuation System
Terms of reference
Study of the NFPA 130 and other relevant national/international

standards regarding emergency evacuation system
Study of practices adopted in various metro systems in India and
elsewhere along with the underlying logic/reasons (at least 3 metros each
in USA, Europe, Japan, China and South East Asia to be studied).
Study of particular requirements of emergency evacuation with respect to
elevated, underground and at-grade routes.
Study of report by NOVA (available with DMRC)/COMET (a society of
heavy metros) in this regard.
Study of procedure adopted during emergency evacuation such as
power off, ETS activation, signaling interface etc. particularly in
systems having third rail traction.
Analysis of data collected including structured presentation of database.
Report covering all the above issues including summary and
recommendations.
Item No. 3 Coupling arrangement (Automatic, semi-automatic etc.)
Terms of reference

Study of various types of couplers being used in Indian railways and
various metros in India and elsewhere.
Study of the relevant Indian and International standards in this regard.
Study of functional advantages offered by various types of couplers
(automatic viz-a-viz. semi-automatic couplers).
Collection of data regarding various suppliers of various types of
couplers both in India and elsewhere
Information gathering regarding regular suppliers of such items to Indian
Railways, DMRC, BMRCL, Kolkata Metro.
Preliminary cost analysis of each type of couplers including studying
impact of imported components/assembly.
Study of maintenance practices of trains being followed by Indian
Railways, Kolkata Metro, DMRC and BMRC and assessment of
instances of coupling and de-coupling of units and coaches in depots as
well as on lines.
Study of an assessment report conducted by BMRCL in this regard.
Report comprising above issues, analysis, recommendations and way
forward.
Item 4 Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rake, Power to weight ratio/ %

motorization
Terms of reference
Study and analysis of key parameters of rolling stock viz.
Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rate and suggest Power-to-weight ratio &
% motorization and suggestion for standardization
Above study shall be based on cost benefit analysis carried out using
appropriate simulation tools as well as results of actual experience of
2MC + 1TC (of BMRCL) and 1MC+1TC (of DMRC). The study shall
analyse impact on transit/round trip time with above configuration of
trains.
BT Comments:
Acceleration with 50% motorisation is around 0.8 m/s maximum between
0 to 30 kmph
Acceleration with 67% motorisation is around 1.1 m/ maximum between
0 to 30 kmph.
Service Deceleration Rate - same level as acceleration rate to ensure max. use
of regeneration
Emergency Deceleration Rate (DR) - Specify braking distance instead of
deceleration rate - normally maximum DR is 1.2 m/s. Higher rate shall
complicate brake pad design due to high thermal requirements.
Average interstation distance - 1 to 1.2 kms
Motorisation - Most of the Metros around the world are above 50%
motorisation either 60%, 67% , 75% or even 100%. Motorisation of 50%
is suboptimal as it leads to low acceleration, lesser scheduled speeds,
maximum usage of brake pads and less regeneration energy. See attached
power point slides.
Scheduled speed - around 34 kmph ( depends on alignment and curves)
Minimum adhesion levels- Normal - 16%. Worst - 8% (criteria for safe

braking distances)
These performance values are outcome of system design, there is no generic
recommendations about these. It depends on overall railway
system being planned
Acceleration with 50% motorisation is around 0.8 m/s maximum between
0 to 30 kmph
Acceleration with 67% motorisation is around 1.1 m/ maximum between
0 to 30 kmph.
Service Deceleration Rate - same level as acceleration rate to ensure max. use
of regeneration
Emergency Deceleration Rate (DR) - Specify braking distance instead of
deceleration rate - normally maximum DR is 1.2 m/s. Higher rate shall
complicate brake pad design due to high thermal requirements.
Average interstation distance - 1 to 1.2 kms
Motorisation - Most of the Metros around the world are above 50%
motorisation either 60%, 67% , 75% or even 100%. Motorisation of 50%
is suboptimal as it leads to low acceleration, lesser scheduled speeds,
maximum usage of brake pads and less regeneration energy. See attached
power point slides.
Scheduled speed - around 34 kmph ( depends on alignment and curves)
Minimum adhesion levels- Normal - 16%. Worst - 8% (criteria for safe

braking distances)
Item No. 5 Eligibility/qualification criteria for procurement

Views and system adopted by various Metros
Eligibility criteria should focus on in-house Design capability, Vehicle
Integration experience and Service proveness for minimum 5 years in
different environment and should specified for each of the following

critical components a) carbody b) bogies c) Propulsion Systems & 4)
Vehicle Integration
Design Capability - No metro product is off the shelf and needs to be

modified to the specific needs of customer and the environment. Design
capability ensures that the bidder has the capability to design to the new
environment as well as has the capability to find quick design solutions
when failures occur in service. For this reasons certain eligibility criteria
to test the design capability of bidders in at least two to three countries
could be introduced.
Vehicle Integration Capability -

Metro projects are greenfield projects and hence all the systems like
Signaling, communication, tracks are new. Vehicle Integration capability
highlights the ability of the bidder to integrate his rolling stock with other
contractors and find suitable solutions to integration issues that will arise
during the Testing & commissioning phase.
Service Proveness in different countries is required to test the capability of

the Design to adapt to different environment and also to check the
reliability of the system offered.
Item No.6 Propulsion Single source or consortium/JV approach.

Views and system adopted by various Metros
BT Comments:
A consortium approach ensures that the Propulsion supplier is part of
the consortium and is committed to delivering his commitment as
per the contractual obligations.Else normally the suppliers may have
a separate arrangement on warranty clauses/ reliability clauses with
the Rolling Stock bidders which may not be aligned with Contractual
requirements. This may create contractual issues during execution.
On the other side a non- consortium approach may allow certain
bidders ( who do not manufacture propulsion equipment ) to have
enough negotiating power post contract. However, this seems to
have little effect on bidding price as the same is decided by
competition.

IR Query
Control and communication protocol
Details of Common/published standard/standards for Train Control &
Management System (TCMS). Views may be given taking terms of
reference into consideration.
BT Comments:
TCMS is critical for train operation, reliability and safety. Train builders
and equipment suppliers use different solutions and protocols; normally
supplier specific hardware and common network solutions and protocols,
such as MVB, CAN, Ethernet. Requirements need to be of functional type
while flexibility is provided for type of solutions.
IR Query
Indigenization
Your views on indigenous development and constraints in the process and
strategy required to be adopted for the same.
BT Comments - This needs detailed discussions with a view to ensure

long-term Spare Parts & Service availability during the lifetime of rolling
stock. Unfortunately the indigenization requirement is not very stringent in
metro Tenders in India except a few tenders. Other countries have utilized
the mandatory localization concept effectively to develop the local industry
in terms of technology and quality through mandatory indigenization
criteria.
BT Comments
Additional points to be considered:
The price of the rolling stock depends not only on Technical features but
also on delivery conditions, contractual conditions, ordered quantity,
Design Cost ( closeness to standard product)
Some areas which can be looked into are the following:
1. Technical features -Every specification has two features a) "Nice to

Have" and b) "Must Have" features. It has been observed that several
of the "Nice to Have" featrures get introduced in the specification
through earlier base specification sources. We recommend to have
discussion with suppliers well before bidding stage in an effort to
remove cost drivers ( nice to have features) which are not
performance oriented. There is a trend in recent specifications in Europe
to separate "Nice to Have" requirements clearly from mandatory "Must
Have" features. This provides a better insight for the Employer in the
quality of the train builders offers.
2. Bidding Time - Provide suitable bid time - Atleast 3 months from the
date of release of final addendum after discussions with suppliers
3. Design & delivery time - Provide sufficient Design time to improve

reliability and avoid retrofits ( Final Design Completion 90 weeks).
Delivery of prototype to around 22-24 months from NTP + 3 months
commissioning time
4. Arbitration Clause (Selection of Arbitration Panel) - Provide equitable

clause for selection of Arbitration panel in line with Indian Arbitration and
Reconciliation Act -1996
5. Warranty - Restrict warranty to 2 years maximum from delivery of each

trainset
6. Supplier Approval process - Allow bidders to provide a Supplier list

during Tender submission qualifying certain service experience norms on
supply for 5 years etc as specified in the Tender ( for major components
like - bogies, propulsion, HVAC, Doors, TCMS etc). Once the supplier's
qualify these norms the suppliers should be allowed to choose his Supplier
from the list during contarct execution. Rejection of suppliers from the list
or addition of new suppliers during contract execution adds risk cost to the
bid price.
7. Order Quantity - Ensure Order quantity is large to enable bidders

leverage economy of scale and spread the Design Cost. As far as possible
include only positive Optional Quantity Clause. Negative optional
Quantity Clause will not get the best price.
8. Standardization & Ordered Quantity - At this stage most of the major

cities requiring huge volumes of Rolling Stock have ( Delhi, Chennai,
Kolkata , partly Mumbai)already completed their procurement process.
We would now see a trend of only Tier II cities going in for procurement
of Rolling Stock henceforth, where the requirement shall be only of the
order of 60 -80 cars. Unless the specification across Tier II cities are
standardized this will result in high cost of metro cars. Standardization
shall also help in pooling of Rolling Stock requirement across metros to
get the best price.
8. Risk Provisions - Tender documents should minimize ambiguity in

clauses - both technical & commercial to enable bidders to appropriately
quantify risks. Too much ambiguity in the Tender documents may lead to
high risk provisioning. This can be mitigated by having sufficient
interaction time with bidders before the bid.

BEML DRAFT VIEWS ON TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STANDARDISATION OF METRO
ROLLING STOCK
Noise level:
The permissible noise levels specified in some of the Indian metros are brought out
below.
Project Internal Noise

Stationary Stationary Running Running
(elevated & at (tunnel) (elevated & at (tunnel)
grade) grade)
DMRC RS3 68 / 68 75 / 72 72 / 70 -
Saloon / cab
BMRCL 68 / 68 75 / 72 72 / 70 88 / 82
Saloon / cab
Chennai 71 / 70 - 78 / 75 -
Saloon / cab
Project External Noise

Stationary Running
DMRC RS3 67 84
(at 7.5 m)
BMRCL 67 84
(at 7.5 m)
Chennai 65 82
(at 15 m)
Annexure 7 BEML 1
The external noise is to be measured in accordance with ISO 3095 and internal noise
as per ISO 3381.
Achieving the interior and exterior noise limits on elevated track in running condition
are the main constraints. As train noise running on the elevated track is highly
influenced by the vibro-acoustic characteristics of infrastructure, giving guaranteed
noise performance of train on the elevated track is difficult. Sound and vibration will
not be properly absorbed on elevated track as compared to at-grade track. Also, rail
and wheel roughness should be maintained within acceptable limits of the standards
before taking measurements.
To recommend the acceptable noise performance vis a vis track specifications for
Indian metros, it is opined that experts in the field may be required to carry out a
study.
Emergency evacuation system
All rail vehicles should have sufficient evacuation facilities to ensure that people may
make a rapid and safe exit. Where the vehicles are to be used on routes which have
restricted clearances, due to significant operation in tunnels, end emergency egress
facilities are provided. For other routes, side egress leading to side walkway is
provided. Vehicles shall be designed to ensure that evacuation & escape can be
performed safely under reasonably foreseeable emergency conditions.
BS 6853:1999, Code of practice for fire precautions in the design and construction of
passenger carrying trains, classifies rail vehicle into two categories; Category I as
underground and category II as surface. Category I is further subdivided into category
Ia and Ib. Category Ia refers to vehicles having substantial operating periods in a
single track tunnel with no side exits to a walkway. Category Ib refers to vehicles
having substantial operating periods in a multi track tunnel or a tunnel with side exits
to a walkway. Category II refers to surface stock with no substantial operating period
Annexure 7 BEML 2
in tunnels. The fire test requirements brought out in the standard are different for
the above category of vehicles with category Ia having the most stringent values.
The emergency egress system provided in the Indian metros is as follows:
Kolkata metro (North South) end evacuation

Delhi metro RS1 & RS2 end evacuation
Delhi metro RS3 side evacuation
Bangalore metro side evacuation
Chennai metro side evacuation
Jaipur metro side evacuation
Specification requirements of the following metros are also listed
Kolkata metro (East West) side evacuation

Hyderabad metro end evacuation
Delhi metro RS10 end evacuation & side evacuation in acute emergency.
In view of the above, it is opined that the choice of end egress or side egress is
dependent on the operating environment and the decision needs to be taken based on
the proposed metro system. Either of the systems can be provided by the rolling stock
supplier.
Coupling arrangement:
The type of coupling arrangement depends on the train configuration. The various
combinations in the Indian metros are as follows:
Two car basic unit with 4 / 6 / 8 car train formation.

Three car basic unit with 3 / 6 car train formation.
In the 2 car basic unit type, the coupling arrangement is as follows:
Automatic mechanical & pneumatic coupler at either end of train formation /

rake
Annexure 7 BEML 3
Semi-permanent coupler between coaches in the same basic unit. Electrical
coupling is through jumper cables between cars.
Automatic mechanical, pneumatic and electrical coupler between two basic
units.
In the 3 car basic unit type, the coupling arrangement is as follows:
Automatic mechanical & pneumatic coupler at either end of train formation /

rake
Semi-permanent coupler between coaches in the same basic unit. Electrical
coupling is through jumper cables between cars.
Automatic mechanical, pneumatic and electrical coupler between two basic
units for a 6 car train formation.
The coupling arrangement in the various Indian metros is brought out below:
Project Ends of rake / train Between cars in Between two basic

formation basic unit units
DMRC RS1 Automatic mechanical Semi-permanent Automatic mechanical,
& pneumatic pneumatic & electrical
Jaipur metro Automatic mechanical Semi-permanent Automatic mechanical,
Bangalore Automatic mechanical Semi-permanent
metro-3 car & pneumatic
Hyderabad Automatic mechanical Semi-permanent
metro- 3 car & pneumatic
Kolkata Automatic mechanical Semi-permanent Automatic mechanical
metro E-W & pneumatic & pneumatic, jumper
Annexure 7 BEML 4
6 car cables for electrical
6 car & pneumatic pneumatic & electrical
The couplers for the Indian metros are mainly being supplied by Voith Turbo, Germany
and Dellner, Sweden. Voith Turbo has supplied for DMRC RS1 and RS3 & BMRCL
projects. Dellner has supplied for DMRC RS2 project. Both the firms have set up
subsidiary units in India for local manufacturing. Faiveley also manufactures couplers
& their make couplers are proposed for Chennai metro. Voith couplers are of
Scharfenberg (Schaku) type. The Dellner and Faiveley couplers are also of similar
type. The design of the couplers depends on the type of coupler head, amount of
energy absorption required, coupling range, etc.
Semi-permanent coupler is the cheapest, costing around 2.5 to 3.0 lakhs INR.
Automatic mechanical & pneumatic coupler costs around 3 to 4 times of semi-
permanent. Automatic mechanical, electrical & pneumatic coupler costs almost two
times the cost of automatic mechanical & pneumatic coupler. In view of this, to
reduce the cost of car, automatic electrical coupling may be avoided or kept to the
bare minimum.
Operating Characteristics
The typical values of acceleration, deceleration, jerk rate, etc adopted by Indian
metros for Standard Gauge track are as follows:
50% motorization:
Characteristic DMRC RS3 Chennai Jaipur

25 KV AC 25 KV AC 25 KV AC
Average 0.8 0.8 0.8
acceleration from 0
Annexure 7 BEML 5
to 30 kmph in m/s2
Instantaneous 1.0 1.0 1.0
deceleration from
80 to 0 kmph in
m/s2
Average emergency 1.3 1.3 1.3
deceleration in
m/s2
Jerk rate in m/s3 0.7 0.7 0.7
Schedule speed 34 34 34
(normal mode) in
kmph
67% motorization:
Characteristic BMRCL Kolkata E-W Hyderabad DMRC RS10

750 VDC 750 VDC 25 KV AC 25 KV AC
Average 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
acceleration from
0 to 30 kmph in
m/s2
Instantaneous 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0
deceleration from
80 to 0 kmph in
m/s2
Average 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3
emergency
deceleration in
m/s2
Jerk rate in m/s3 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.0
Annexure 7 BEML 6
Schedule speed 34 33 - -
(normal mode) in
kmph
For both 50% and 67% motorization, the schedule speed in normal mode is almost the
same. The acceleration levels are higher in 67% motorization which will be helpful in
routes with frequent gradients. The major advantage of 67% motorization is that more
amount of regenerative energy will be available, thereby reducing the net energy
consumption for traction. However, whether the regenerated energy can be utilized
in a 750 VDC third rail system, needs to be studied. For 25 KV AC system, the
regenerated energy can be utilized fully. This kind of system is being adopted for
Hyderabad and DMRC RS10 projects. The initial & maintenance cost of propulsion for
67% motorization will be higher, however there will be savings towards energy cost.
The net savings and performance of 67% motorization in 25 KV AC system in Indian
conditions can be evaluated after Hyderabad metro is operational.
Eligibility / qualification criteria for procurement of Rolling stock
At present, Metro corporations float Global Tenders for sourcing Rolling Stock with
typical eligibility criteria as follows.
The bidder should have experience in Design, manufacture, Testing &

commissioning of Metro cars/Electrical Multiple Units
The Applicant or Consortium / JV or its members individually or jointly as

member of other Consortia in their respective roles carried out design,
manufacture, supply, testing, commissioning & Integration of a minimum of 200
nos of stainless steel cars with similar features including traction propulsion
system, ATP/ ATO systems etc. in the preceding 10 years. At least 50% of the
above 200 cars should have been supplied and proven in service for a period of
5 years or more in India or in a country other than the country of manufacture
Annexure 7 BEML 7
The rolling stock, including all sub-systems and equipment shall be of proven
design. Sub-systems and equipment of similar design philosophy shall have been
in use and have established their performance reliability on a mass rapid
transit system or suburban EMUs in revenue service over a period of five years
or more. Where similar equipment or sub-systems of a different rating are
already proven in service, then the design shall be based on such equipments.
For certain subsystems like Propulsion, at least 200 cars of the proposed
assembly/sub assembly should have been proven in service in metro cars in the
last 10 years; Out of the 200 cars, 100 cars should have been proven in service
for at least 5 years in a country other than the country of origin of manufacture
The eligibility and qualification criteria may include the following provisions for Indian
manufacturers:
The bidder should have metro car manufacturing facility in India
Should have manufactured/assembled/supplied minimum 300 nos. metro cars

in India and supplied to Indian Metro corporations either through consortium
route or independently
The bidder should have executed projects in India based on Transfer of

Technology arrangement with reputed global players
Procurement of propulsion equipment:
In the Indian metros under revenue service, the responsibility of propulsion

equipment & train management system is with a single source. For the DMRC RS2
project it is Bombardier and for DMRC RS1, RS3 and BMRCL it is MELCO. MELCO is also
the consortium partner in the respective projects. The advantage of the propulsion
supplier being in the consortium is that they are also equally responsible for
successful execution of the project. In the case of DMRC RS2, the main contractor,
Annexure 7 BEML 8
Bombardier, is responsible for the propulsion. However, certain items may be
procured by the propulsion contractor from other sources. The qualification criteria
specified by the Indian metro Corporations for propulsion system is very stringent and
only established global players will qualify.
It is opined that the propulsion may be procured from a single source so that the
responsibility for the integration of the complete system is with a single party. Also,
JV of reputed foreign & Indian companies may be allowed to ensure transfer of latest
technology & indigenous manufacture in the country.
Control and communication protocol
DMRC RS3 and BMRCL projects are having MELCO supplied TMS. The train bus
communication in these systems is ARCNET defined by ANSI / ATA 878.1. Local bus
communication is RS485 / RS422 defined by EIA (Electronics Industries Association).
The interfacing with different sub-systems is carried out by the TMS sub-contractor
and the various sub-system suppliers in co-ordination with the rolling stock
contractor.
Indigenisation:
The specification requirement of metro cars is very stringent and based on established
international standards. This is required in view of the need for safety of the
passengers, high reliability and availability of the rolling stock.
The major needs / constraints for indigenous development are:
Technical know- how and know -why

Infrastructural facilities
Type and routine test facilities
Skilled trained manpower
Maintaining Quality to ensure high reliability & availability
Annexure 7 BEML 9
Normally, Global Metro Manufacturers establish in-house infrastructure/ facilities for
manufacture of Carbody & Bogie frames, assembly, integration & testing. Major
aggregates are sourced from established limited global suppliers who have already
supplied to other Metros with satisfactory performance record.
Infrastructural facilities for manufacture of carbody and bogie frame and its
outfitting items like GFRP panels, grab poles & rails, window glasses, glass wool
insulation, electrical panels, battery box, stainless steel and aluminium fabricated
items, etc are also available. For critical sub-systems like propulsion, brake, door,
HVAC, passenger address & Passenger information system, CCTV, gangway, bogie
suspension, gearbox, etc there are few established global suppliers with satisfactory
performance record and they should be encouraged to either set up their subsidiary in
India or transfer technology to an Indian company through JV. Certain items like
wheel and axle may have to be imported as present Indian manufacturers are having
capacity constraints.
The specifications need to be standardized to increase the volumes. Presently, the

specifications are drafted on project to project basis. The major specifications which
require standardization are axle capacity, train formation including basic unit
composition, kinematic envelope, track parameters including minimum radius of
curvature, operating voltage, overhead or third rail current collection, etc.
Standardization will result in higher volumes, more vendors will show interest and the
cost will come down. Also, the cost towards design and type test can be amortised
over large number of cars.
Annexure 7 BEML 10
Infrastructure & Cities
Name Shiv Chopra

Department IC RL MCL MC
Advisor Electrical (G),
Ministry of Railways,
Telephone +91 11 30995447
New Delhi Fax +91 11 23736274
Mobile +91 9999450690
E-mail [email protected]
Your letter
Our reference
Date
Kind Attention :Mr. R. K. Bhattnagar
Sub: Comments on Agenda of Sub-Committee on Rolling Stock

_
Ref: Meeting on 3rd Dec2012 to discuss the Agenda of Sub-Committee on Rolling Stock
Dear Sir,
With reference to the agenda for Sub-committee on Rolling Stock and subsequent meeting, we are
pleased to submit our comments as under :
1. Noise
Siemenss comments :
Recommended values are
Interior Exterior
Motorization
( %) Tunnel Elevated Cab Tunnel Elevated
Stationary Running Stationary Running Running Stationary Running Stationary Running
72 dBA 68 dBA
82 dBA
( 50 KmpH) ( 50 kmph)
67 68 dBA NA 64 dBA NA NA 67 dBA (at 75
75 dBA 70 dBA
kmph)
( 75 Kmph) ( 75 KmpH)
Standard for measurement shall be ISO 3381 and ISO 3095 for inside and outside measurements
respectively.
2. Vibration
As discussed in sub-committees meeting, the study under this topic is beyond the scope sub-committee.
3. Emergency Evacuation System
Siemenss comments:
Emergency Evacuation System should be at the Front centre in Driving cars of the train.
Annexure 8 SIEMENS Page 1

With our experience, most of the rolling stock operating different parts of the world have evacuation by
Front Centre including the rolling stock supplied by Siemens.
4. Coupling Arrangement
Siemenss comments:
Considering the operation, maintenance and costs aspects we recommend to use as under :
Automatic coupler without electrical head at the two ends of the train.
Automatic couplers without electrical head between the basic units with electrical connection via
jumper cables OR Semi permanent couplers between the basic units.
_ Semi-permanent couplers between the cars within the basic unit.
Gangways : Split type of gangways for all interconnection between the coaches.
We would like to share that the automatic couplers without electrical heads are cheaper by nearly 20%
than the automatic couplers with electrical heads. Further the Semi-permanent couplers are cheaper by
nearly 20% than the automatic couplers without electrical heads.
5. Acceleration
Siemenss comments:
Minimum Design Average Acceleration rate for fully loaded ( AW3) train on level tangent track shall be as
under:
0 kmph to 40 kmph : 1.0 m/s2
0 to 60Kmph : 0.6 m/s2
0 to 80Kmph : 0.3 m/s2
Minimum Operational Average Acceleration rate for AW2 loaded train on level tangent track shall be as
under:
0 kmph to 35 kmph : 1.20 m/s2
0 to 60Kmph : 0.65 m/s2
0 to 80Kmph : 0.35 m/s2
Please note that for Metro Lines between 15 to 20 Kms, higher acceleration is more suitable as with higher
schedule speeds fleet size can be optimized.
This is more so important as Tier 2 & 3 cities in India would have such line lengths.
Error! Reference source not

found.2Error! Reference source not found.9
6. Deaccelaration
Siemenss comments:
Service braking rate from 85 kmph to standstill for fully loaded (AW3)
train on level tangent track : 1.0 m/s2
Service braking rate from 85 kmph to standstill for AW2 train on level
tangent track : 1.1 m/s2
7. Jerk Rate
_ Siemenss comments: 0.75 m/s3
8. Motorization rate
Siemenss comments:
We would like to share that the motorization rate and the train size are related topics and should be decided
together for all new metro projects.
Therefore, We should first finalize the optimum train size in terms of number of cars and then based on
evaluation of suitable motorization rate, appropriate Basic Unit configuration should be finalized.
Step - 1 : Optimum Train Size
In order to work out a optimum train size, we would like to evaluate the optimum requirement with respect
to the PHPDT (Peak Hour Peak Direction Traffic) Demand. Following table highlights the utilization rate of
different train sizes w.r.t PHPDT demand :
Train Size PHPDT demand

10000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000
3 Car PHPDT Capacity 45600 45600 45600 45600 45600 45600
Utilization rate 21.93% 43.86% 54.82% 65.79% 76.75% 87.72%
4 Car PHPDT Capacity 60800 60800 60800 60800 60800 60800 60800
Utilization rate 16.45% 32.89% 41.12% 49.34% 57.57% 65.79% 82.24%
6 Car PHPDT Capacity 91200 91200 91200 91200 91200 91200 91200 91200 91200 91200
Utilization rate 10.96% 21.93% 27.41% 32.89% 38.38% 43.86% 54.82% 65.79% 76.75% 87.72%
Table 1

Note :
The PHPDT capacity for different train sizes, is based on passenger capacity of 380 numbers per coach with
a headway of 90seconds from System Design perspective i.e maximum 40 trains of each train size could
be operated in one hour.
The headway of 90 seconds is achievable with modern Signalling systems.
The above data does not reflect the Fleet Size which will depend upon other factors like line Length,
schedule speed etc..
Following conclusions can be drawn from Table - 1 :

a) For PHPDT Demand between 10000 to 40000, 3 car train is the most optimum as the utilization rate is the
best.
b) For PHPDT Demand between 40000 to 80000, 6 car train is the most optimum as the utilization rate is the
_ best.
Step - 2 : Possible Motorization rates for different Train Sizes
Based on the conclusions from Step - 1, in order to finalize the motorization rate and the basic unit
configuration, please refer to different possibilities as depicted in Table 2 below :
Train Size Motorization rate

50% 67% 75% 100%
3 Car
X with 3 car X
basic unit
4 Car
X Basic unit configuration will be
lost, 3 types of cars
6 Car
with 2 car basic with 3 car Basic unit configuration will be
unit basic unit lost, 3 types of cars
8 Car
with 2 car basic X Basic unit configuration will be
unit lost, 3 types of cars
9 Car

Basic unit
with 3 car Basic unit configuration will be
configuration will
basic unit lost, 3 types of cars
be lost
Table - 2
Following conclusions can be drawn from Table 2 :

a) Corresponding to the Train size of 3 cars, motorization rate of 67% and 100% is possible.
b) Corresponding to the Train size of 6 cars, motorization rate of 50%, 67% and 100% is possible.
c) For both Train sizes of 3 car and 6 car, though Motorization rate of 75% is possible, it is not viable as
Basic Unit configuration is lost which poses challenges for running and maintenance operations.

Step 3 : Optimum Motorization rate for 3 car basic unit
In order to arrive at optimum motorization rate, a comparison among the motorization rates of 50%, 67%
and 100% is shown as under in terms of performance and the resultant costs.
Following are possible train configurations corresponding to 50%, 67% and 100%.
Legend: DMC Driving Motor Car
DTC Driving Trailer Car
MC Motor Car
TC Trailer Car
+ Automatic coupler
= Semi-permanent coupler
Train formations with 50% Motorization rate :
_
6-car formation
+DMC=TC+MC=TC+TC=DMC+ or +DTC=MC+MC=TC+MC=DTC+
Capacity: 2250 passengers in W3 load (seats + 8 standees per sqm)
Note : Each 2-car unit is equipped with 1 transformer and 1 pantograph, means in total there are 3
transformer/ pantograph sets per 6-car train.
3-car formation :
+DMC=TC=DMC+
6-car formation
+DMC=TC=DMC+DMC=TC=DMC+ or +DMC=TC=MC+MC=TC=DMC+
Note : 3-car unit is equipped with only 1 transformer and 1 pantograph, means in total there are 2
transformer/pantograph sets per 6-car train.

There is possibility of 2 car basic unit as it is difficult to pack a set of Transformer, Traction Converter
and auxiliary converter in one coach.
A. Train Performance : Adhesion & Acceleration
The possible acceleration rates for different motorization rates at normally available adhesion limits is as
under :
Acceleration* Acceleration* Acceleration* Adhesion Limits

with 50% Traction with 67% Traction with 100% Traction
For normal operation (100% power is available) :
0.8 m/s2 1.065 m/s2 1.603 m/s2 16.3%
0.88 m/s2 1.175 m/s2 1.762 m/s2 18.0%
With 25% loss of Power (Design Criteria) :
0.601 m/s2 0.798 m/s2 1.202 m/s2 16.3%
0.661 m/s2 0.883 m/s2 1.327 m/s2 18.0%
Table 3
* The above values of acceleration are calculated with following basis :

Level tangent track. (With gradients, higher adhesion would be required).

Rotational mass is not considered.
Please refer to Annexure -1 which depicts the calculation of adhesion limits for the desired accelerations.
a) From above it can be seen that it is possible to accelerate at > 0.85 m/s2 within the adhesion limit of
18% in case of 25% loss of power with 67% traction and 100% traction as compared to 50% traction
wherein a maximum acceleration of 0.66 m/s2 is ONLY possible which will not be sufficient to meet
the Time Table of the metro service.
b) Higher acceleration helps to increase the schedule speeds upto 38 kmph as compared to 31kmph in
recent metros. This is very critical in projects wherein the lines are 15 to 20 Kms long as fleet size of
rolling stock can be optimized.
_ c) Acceleration more than 1.0 m/s2 would not be necessary in a metro system as the inter-station
distances are small. Therefore 67% traction would be more than sufficient.
B. Cost Impact on 6 car train with50% , 67% and 100% motorization rates
Capital Costs :
Possible indicator for capital cost is the number of main equipments in both types of traction systems.
A comparison of number of equipments is as under :
6 car train 6 car train 6 car train
(50% motorization) (67% Motorization) (100% Motorization)
Basic Unit 2 car 3-car 1 car/ 2 car
Configuration
No. of Traction 3 2 6/ 3
Transformers
No. of Traction 6 4 6
Converters (Bogie Control is (Coach Control is (Coach Control is
necessary for acceptable ensuring acceptable ensuring
redundancy) redundancy) redundancy)
No. of Aux. 3 2 6/3
Converters
Sets of 3 sets 2 sets 6/3
Pantograph, VCBs
& HV components
No. of Automatic 2 2 2
couplers without
electrical head
No. of Automatic 4 2 10/4
Couplers with
electrical heads
Sets. Of Semi- 2 sets 4 sets 0/2 sets
permanent
Couplers
Brakes Disc Brakes TBUs TBUs
(as costly disc brakes (as costly disc brakes
can be avoided due to can be avoided due to
higher available higher available
electrical braking electrical braking
power) power)
Table - 4
a) The number of main costly equipments like transformers, converters etc. is least with 67%
motorization rate as compared with 50% & 100% motorization rate.
b) Since the number of equipments are fewer with 67% motorization rate, not only the cost of
equipments but also the installation & commissioning costs per train would be less.
c) 67% motorization rate provides right balance between the redundancy and reliability& availability.
d) Therefore it can be clearly concluded that the capital cost of complete rolling stock with 67%
motorization rate shall be lower in comparison with 50% & 100% motorization rate.
Maintenance Costs :
_
Maintenance costs with 67% motorization rate shall be lower as compared to maintenance costs
with 50% & 100% motorization rate. Main reasons being :
a. Use of Fewer number of equipments per train which has following advantages :
Less wear and tear on Overhead Catenary Line due to less no. of pantographs km.
Maintenance cost of tracks shall be lower. This can be substantiated from the summary of
achievable adhesions limits with both systems as under :
For normal With 25% loss of Power

operation (Design Criteria)
For acceleration of 0.8 m/s2
With 50% 16.3 % 21.8 %
Motorization
With 67% 12.2 % 16.3 %
Motorization
With 100% 8.2% 10.9%
Motorization
For acceleration of 1.0 m/s2
With 50% 20.4 % 27.2 %
Motorization
With 67% 15.3 % 20.4 %
Motorization
With 100% 10.2% 13.6%
Motorization
b. As use of mechanical brakes is minimized due to higher available electrical braking, the wear &
tear of mechanical brakes is less.
Energy Costs :
With 67% traction, there is 17% extra regeneration of electrical power during braking w.r.t
50% motorization rate.
However, energy saving for 100% motorization over 67% motorization is practically zero
as electrical brakes would be sufficient to brake the train at the given deceleration rates
without use of mechanical brakes and hence the energy savings would be comparable to
100% motorization.

C. Recommendation for Train sizes and motorization rate :
1. Optimum Train Size : 3 Car/ 6 Car

i. For PHPDT Demand between 10000 to 40000, 3 car train is the most optimum as the utilization
rate is the best.
ii. For PHPDT Demand between 40000 to 80000, 6 car train is the most optimum as the utilization
rate is the best.
2. Motorization rate : 67% motorization rate should be standardized due to following reasons :
Higher acceleration of 1.1 m/s2 is possible with adhesion of 18%. Higher acceleration with 100%
motorization rate is not necessary for Metro systems.
During emergency condition of 25% motorization cut out, higher acceleration of 0.88 m/s2 is
possible with adhesion of 18%.
_ As explained in conclusion under point A, the operational advantages of higher acceleration rate
and adhesion go a long way in optimizing the fleet size and thereby reducing the cost of a Metro
system especially with line lengths of 10 to 15 Kms. E.g. considering a cost of Rs.10 Crores per car
to an operator, a reduction of 10 number of cars would save Rs.100 Crores for a project. This
advantage is substantial for cities having lower PHPDT during the start of the project and wherein
cost is a major concern.
Regeneration of energy is better with 67% traction over 50% traction as 17% extra re-generation is
possible. However, difference of energy savings between 67% motorization and 100%
motorization is practically zero.
Capital & Maintenance cost is lower with 67% traction.
3. 3 Car formation with 67% and 6 car formation with 67% motorization rate should be standardized.
It can be noted that all latest projects in India Hyderabad, Kolkata (E-W), Bangalore,
Gurgaon and Delhi Ph III have adopted the concept of 3 car basic unit with 67% motorization.
This is also a trend in global market.
4. Following dimensions are recommended for rolling stock :

width : 2.9 mtrs to 3.2 mtrs
length : maximum 22 mtrs (including end fairings).
9. Eligibility Criteria
Siemenss comments:
We would like to share that almost all components of rolling stock are manufactured by local companies
including subsidiaries of multinational companies in our country. This has been possible with the projects
coming from Indian Railways and Metros projects mainly Delhi, Bangalore and Chennai.
These investments are in the interest of our nation considering the employment opportunities and
availability of technology locally. In view of this, items like Car body, Bogies and Propulsion equipment like
Traction Transformer, Traction converter, auxiliary converter and Traction Motors "MUST" be localized.
Please note that cost economics of localization would be highly favorable with the progress of
standardization.

Kindly refer the Annexure - 2 for the proposed eligibility criteria.
10. Propulsion single source/ consortium approach
Siemenss comments:
It is recommended to have "Single source" for full propulsion chain i.e transformers, traction converter,
auxiliary converter and Traction Motors considering the interface and integration aspects of the system.
The recommended eligibility criteria for a propulsion supplier shall be as per Annexure 2.
Further regarding the Consortium or sub-supplier approach, the issue primarily depends upon the
_ strengths of the mechanical partner in terms of system integration and interface management.
For an experienced car manufacturer, propulsion supplier could be a sub-supplier however for a lesser
experienced mechanical partner who is also leader of the project, it would be better to have propulsion
supplier as consortium partner.
11. TCMS : TCMS should be from the propulsion supplier same as in point 10 above
Siemenss comments:
TCMS should be from the propulsion supplier for better integration of the complete propulsion system
and controls to avoid any technical glitches due to interface management issuesin case of different
suppliers for TCMS and propulsion supplier.
This will enable single party liability during the DLP and post DLP period and also lower cost of inventory of
spares.
12. Driverless trains
Siemenss comments:
It is recommended to have Driverless Trains as Driverless trains enable shorter headways and cost benefits
for the operator over the project life cycle.
This is for your kind reference and perusal. Please feel free to contact us for any additional information.
Yours truly,
Raminder Singh
Chief Manager Metros & Coaches, South Asia
Siemens Ltd.
Encls .:
Annexure 1
Annexure 2

Item No. 5 Eligibility/qualification criteria for procurement
Eligibility criteria has a direct bearing on the cost. Broader the criteria, more the competition and
lesser the cost
Eligibility criteria shouldEncourage competition. Ensure reliability and quality of the rolling
stock
Rolling stock comprises of Car body and Propulsion equipment. Car body manufacturing and
propulsion equipment is supplied by two separate set of suppliers
Alstom Comment: Rolling stock (train) firstly involves a system level design for train
configuration and integration of various RS sub-systems such as mechanicals (car body),
propulsions, TCMS, bogies & brakes, HVAC, electrical equipment (pantographetc), couplers,
interiors, seating etc. and testing & commissioning and full Mass Rail Transit Systems(MRTS)
site-integration in terms of interfacing with other MRTS systems. There are, in summary,
broadly four distinct requirements, namely:
(i) train system design & integration,

(ii) Car body/mechanicals,
(iii) Propulsion system including TCMS and
(iv) Interfacing, testing & commissioning with full MRTS system.
Propulsion System is the core of the train in as much as a diesel engine is of the diesel electric
locomotive. Therefore, the reliability and quality of the propulsion system is central to the
overall performance and energy efficiency of the train.
As on date, three sets of firms are operating in this space.

Set 1: These firms perform the full design and manufacture of the trains. These include
Bombardier, Siemens, Alstom, Ansaldo Breda, Hitachi, etc.
Set 2: These firms do not perform full train design and manufacture but specialize in
manufacture of car body/mechanicals and integration of propulsion system and TCMS from the
specialist suppliers. These include firms such as BEML.
Set 3: These firms are specialist suppliers of propulsion and TCMS namely Bombardier,
Siemens, Alstom, MELCO, Toshiba, Hitachi etc. Some of these specialist suppliers also have the
capability of complete train design, manufacture and integration (Set 1) and therefore have
capability to integrate;
(a) their own design of propulsion systemand TCMS on different type of trains as well as
(b) with Set 3 type of firms who are specialist manufacturers of the car-body &
mechanicals.
It must be noted that the average life of a MRTS Train is about 30 to 40 years. The quality and
performance of the train over its life period will be severely impacted if a patchwork approach
rather than an integrated and optimized design and manufacturing approachare adopted. While
the patchwork approach of procuring the propulsion systems for one supplier, the bogie and
mechanicals from another and the car body from yet another may reduce the capital cost in the
Annexure 9 ALSTOM Page No.1

short run, in terms of the life cycle costs, this approach may not be the most optimal one. It will
also imply relegating the risk associated with the reliability and quality of a core system like the
propulsion system, to a sub-contractor, who is not liable for non-performance or sub optimal
performance of the train.
Therefore, we strongly recommend that in order to ensure international quality, safety and
reliability and performance standards during the entire life cycle, bidders for Indian
MRTS Projects must be jointly and severally responsible for the four critical systems viz:
(i) train system design & integration,
(ii) car body/mechanicals,
(iii) propulsion system including TCMS and
(iv) interfacing, testing & commissioning with full MRTS system
In other words, manufacturers/suppliers of these four components must bid at the JV level rather
than as subcontractors to the main bidder. This is the practice followed internationally for Mass
Rail Transit Systems (MRTS) wherein suppliers of each of the four requirements must be part of
the consortium, and share joint and several responsibilities for RAMS during the life of the
trains.
The details of the qualification in terms of ;

(a) number of successfully executed MRTS projects/trains (calculated in number of cars)
(b) experience in terms of years of supply/manufacture,
(c) number of cars in service at a point of time,
(d) differentenvironments in terms of type of countries/climates/environment conditions
could be defined as the eligibility criteria.
Car body
The specifications of the material, coach parameters and inspection and testing can ensure the
quality of the rolling stock. Some of the reputed Car manufacturers are:
1. CAF
2. BEML
3. CNR
4. CSR
5. ROTTEM
6. Bombardier
7. ALSTOM
8. SIEMENS
Propulsion equipment include Transformer, Motors, Traction Converters and Inverters and
TCMS. The reliability performance of the Rolling stock largely depends on Propulsion
equipment whichneed to be sourced from a proven source. Known propulsion equipment
suppliers include:

1. Bombardier
2. Siemens
3. Alstom
4. Toshiba
5. Mitsubishi
6. Hitachi
7. ABB
Eligibility criteria adopted by various Metros
Sl.No. Manufacturing Experience Operational experience

BMRCL Manufacturer of the propulsion with at least 5 years outside its home
system and other major sub- country.
systems should have at least 10
years experience in this field
CMRCL Have previously designed, At least 50% of the 200 cars/carsets
manufactured, supplied, testing shall have been supplied and proven
and commissioned for a inservice for a period of 5 years or
minimum of 200 cars/carsets more in India, or, in a country other
with than the
comparable features and of country of manufacture
similar complexity in the
preceding 10 years
KMRCL
DMRC RS1
RS2
RS10
LTHMR Propulsion supplier was decided At least 4 years should have been in
on the basis of three different countries (it may be a
operationalproven-ness for 10 consortium or single source)
years
RMGL Supplier should be necessarily a The Propulsion equipments supplier
car builder and should have at need not necessarily be a Consortium
least supplied 200 cars running partner, but should have experience of
for a period of 3years without design and manufactureof minimum
any major problem. 200 nos. of Propulsion System with
similar features which should have
been proven in service for a period of
3 years in a country other than the
country of origin of manufacturer
Kolkata
Metro
IR IR sources propulsion Sub vendors are permitted for other
equipment from reputed OEMs equipment from reliable sources with
who are suppliers of TCMS, proven experience.
IGBT based Traction

converter/Inverters and Traction For Car body and Bogie, Material and
motors and those who have performance criteria is specified which
successfully supplied nos. in is verified before acceptance. Supplier
the past 5 years and out of is also bound by performance
which numbers have been warranty.
working satisfactorily for past 2
years without any country
restriction
Suggestions of Vendors:
Sl No. Manufacturing Experience Operational experience

BEML views The Applicant or Consortium / JV At least 50% of the above 200
for other or its members individually or cars should have been supplied
vendors jointly as member of other and proven in service for a period
Consortia in their respective roles of 5 years or more in India or in a
carried out design, manufacture, country other than the country of
supply, testing, commissioning & manufacture
Integration of a minimum of 200
nos of stainless steel cars with Where similar equipment or sub-
similar features including traction systems of a different rating are
propulsion system, ATP/ ATO already proven in service, then the
systems etc. in the preceding 10 design shall be based on such
years equipment.
BEML views The bidder should have metro car The bidder should have executed
for Indian manufacturing facility in India projects in India based on Transfer
Manufacturer and should have manufactured, of Technology arrangement with
assembled and supplied minimum reputed global players
300 nos. metro car to Indian
Metro corporations either through
consortium route or
independently
Siemens Views Has the Bidder/Cons members, Out of 300 minimum of total 150
individually or jointly as a cars completed satisfactory
member of other Consortia/Joint revenue operation:
Venture or as sub-contractor to EITHER outside the country of
it's parent company have origin in at least three(3) different
experience of and carried out contracts in MRT,LRT,Sub-urban
Vehicle Design, Interface (with Railways or high speed railways
other designated Contractors such of at least three(3) different
as signaling, Track, Traction etc.), countries
Assembly & Supply, Testing and OR in India
Commissioning of minimum of for more than five(5) years.
total 300 metro (i.e.
MRT,LRT,Sub-urban Railways

or high speed railways) cars (out
of which minimum 200 cars shall
be of either Stainless Steel or
Aluminum)
BTs Views Eligibility criteria should focus on Design Capability - No metro

in-house Design capability, product is off the shelf and needs
Vehicle Integration experience to be modified to the specific
and Service proveness for needs of customer and the
minimum 5 years in different environment. Design capability
environment and should specified ensures that the bidder has the
for each of the following critical capability to design to the new
components a) carbody b) bogies environment as well as has the
c) Propulsion Systems & 4) capability to find quick design
Vehicle Integration solutions when failures occur in
service. For this reasons certain
eligibility criteria to test the design
capability of bidders in at least
two to three countries could be
introduced.
Vehicle Integration Capability -

Metro projects are greenfield
projects and hence all the systems
like Signaling, communication,
tracks are new. Vehicle Integration
capability highlights the ability of
the bidder to integrate his rolling
stock with other contractors and
find suitable solutions to
integration issues that will arise
during the Testing &
commissioning phase.
Service Proveness in different

countries is required to test the
capability of the Design to adapt
to different environment and also
to check the reliability of the
system offered.
BT 100% Indian subsidiaries be

permitted
Views of Lead bidder must have experience For sub-systems Similarly, the
Indian in full RS integration, Indian owned subsidiaries of the
Manufacturers manufacture of trains, car shells, suppliers who qualify based on
bogies, propulsion etc. their references in their home
Additionally, there are country be allowed to manufacture
requirements of proven design and supply 100% of the supplies.
and manufacturing sites that have
supplied such proven design.
Indian subsidiaries of the main
bidders who meets all the
required qualification criteria
should be allowed to manufacture
and supply 100% of the supplies.
ALSTOM Bidders who have invested in the

Comments country in setting up a
manufacturing unit must be
incentivized with workload to
sustain their factories. Afterall,
Government of India has been
pursing and coaxing global firms
to bring FDI into India. Hence,
bidders who have invested in the
country must be recognized for
having contributed through
employment generation,
technology transfer and a
fundamental belief in Indian
Economy.
Putting eligibility conditions that

require local Indian subsidiaries
(like Alstom Transport India ) to
have supplied a minimum number
of Metro trains/cars in India will
completely discourage, dissuade
and jeopardize any FDI and any
incentive to set up factories in
India.
Therefore, Indian Subsidiary

Companies, who through their
Parent Group Company have
supplied metro trains/cars
globally, should be given the
benefit of global experience and
hence permitted to meet the
eligibility criteria based on global

credentials.
One way to incentivize such
Local Indian firms could be
through an evaluation process in
which firms with an installed
capacity in India are given
preferential weightage.
The other way is to ensure that
tender evaluation is based on the
landed cost inclusive of taxes and
duties. This point has been further
explained in Item No 9 -
Indigenization
Major Issues
1. Bidder should be car manufacturer or Propulsion equipment manufacturer having system
integration capabilities or one having both the capabilities?
If the Cars are to be procured from sources that manufacture cars and are also OEMs of
propulsion equipment including TCMS, the number of suppliers will get restricted to
very few European suppliers. Car body and propulsion equipment require completely
different kind of manufacturing facilities. Car manufacturers mostly procure 3 phase
propulsion equipment from different vendors like Hitachi, Mitsubishi, Bombardier,
Siemens, Toshiba etc. Hence if car manufacturers are permitted to outsource 3 phase
propulsion equipment from reputed and experienced OEMs with full responsibility with
the OEM for system integration, failure reliability and punctuality performance,
competition will be wider and costs will reduce.
Alstom Comments:There is a significant benefit in having the Bidders who have the
experience and capability to design and integrate a full train. There are already a total of
more than six such RS suppliers Japanese, European, Asian/Korean& Indian firms - as
was witnessed in the recent tenders for Indian Metro Projects. It is felt that competition is
already wide enough. Hence, the benefit of additional competition by allowing
suppliers/manufacturers of propulsion systems, without having joint and several
responsibility of integrating at the train level is likely to be marginal. On the contrary,
this may jeopardize the quality of Rolling Stock/trains supplied in Indian market, given
that these MRTS Rolling stock/trains must operate for a lifecycle of 30 to 40 years.
2. Different country experience

The rationale given by various members of the committee is the presumption that the
environmental conditions in different countries are different, hence eligible supplier
should have supplied similar coaches in different countries. This clause as is being
presently applied is restrictive and favour mainly European suppliers. Even indigenous
suppliers like BEML, who have not supplied to other countries does not get qualified on
its own. Similarly it will restrict supplierswhose main market has been the country of

origin. It is also seen that private Metros RMGL and Reliance Metro Mumbai have
procured Metro Cars without imposing this restriction
Alstom Comments:The RAMS and field service performance of the entire train system
is what ultimatelymatters. The reliability of individual sub-systems is of little
consequence. Ultimately, the responsibility of system integrity rests with the Joint
Venture and hencethe proposal to have the supplier of the Propulsion system as a sub-
contractor goes against the basic philosophy of seeking an integrated metro rolling stock
system, particularly when the RAMS& field service performancedepends to a large
extent on the Propulsion System. This approach of permitting the propulsion system
supplier as a sub contractoris akin to allowing a sub-contractor to provide the diesel
engine of a diesel- electric locomotive and appears to be contrived to suit vested interests.
For RMGL there was only one bid i.e. from Siemens who took full responsibility of the
rolling stock/trains, signaling system and the 750vDC traction electrification. Reliance
Metro will be a very different and new experience and needs to be contrasted from
procurement by a Public Authority. Inthe former case, the private player is willing to take
a calculated risk which cannot be taken in case of procurement by a Public Authority. In
any case, private MRTS are a new experience and we should wait for their successful
operations, before validating that approach.
Introduction of this clause pushes up the cost. IR also has never imposed the country
condition in any of its global tenders, except where Ministry of external affairs restrict
dealings with any country
Rolling stock has to be seen as Car body plus propulsion equipment. As far as car body is
concerned, the performance will not be affected by the environment, performance of
metro cars will however be greatly impacted by the performance of propulsion
equipment. Responsibility of commissioning, system integration rests with the propulsion
equipment supplier. Hence eligibility criteria for the 3 phase propulsion equipment
supplier need to be stringent for ensuring the quality of the rolling stock.
It is thus proposed that more than one country restriction should not be imposed for
qualifying as coach manufacturer. As far as propulsion equipment is concerned, coach
manufacturer who will be the lead partner/bidder should be allowed to source propulsion
equipment from reputed vendorswho have supplied propulsion equipment to more than
one country.
3. Number of years
Some Metro tenders specify that bidder should have at least ten year experience in the
field of system integration and supply of Metro cars and must have supplied 200 to 300
cars in last 10 years, out of which 50% in last 5 years. This clause is very restrictive and
will discourage indigenization. BEML who have been supplying Stainless steel coaches
successfully cannot independently bid for Metros.

10 years is a long period. Further current performance is more important. So 5 years
performance thus should be seen. It is all the more necessary as there are rapid advances
in the technology and past performance alone should not be the criteria for qualifying as
otherwise we may end up with obsolete technology.
Alstom Comments: The average life of a Metro Rolling Stock/Train is in the vicinity of
30 to 40 years and hence the ten years performance track record seems to be realistic. Ten
years is also a good period to determine whether the trains being supplied by the Bidder
are capable of providing flawless service for the entire life. Given the long gestation
period of infrastructure projects, a prior experience of at least ten years helps to develop a
better assessment of the capability & capacity of the bidder.
Key Recommendations
Bidder must be a coach manufacturer with sufficient experience in supplying Metro
cars during the last 5 years. Bidder can procure propulsion equipment from any
vendor meeting following criteria.
Propulsion equipment supplier must be OEM having experience of supplying

IGBT based propulsion equipment including (TCMS, traction
converters/Inverters and Traction motors) and must have carried out system
integration and commissioning of rakes during last 5 years, which must have
been working satisfactorily for the last 3 years on more than one country or in
India.
ALSTOM Comments: It is proposed that for purposes of evaluating eligibility, the

experience of the Bidder must include the Parent Company experiencethat has set up the
factory(ies) in India through its Subsidiary(ies). Thus, if Global Firms set up a local
subsidiary company that manufactures Metro Rolling Stock/Trains, its global credentials
and experience must be considered, rather than the number of MRTSTrains/Cars that the
local plant has supplied. If that restrictive condition is imposed, it will dissuade any FDI
and employment generation and serve as a disincentive for global firms to set up design
and manufacturing facility in India.
Item No.6 Propulsion Single source or consortium/JV approach.
Issue is whether bids be invited from consortiums of coach manufacturers with

Propulsion equipment supplier as consortium partners or fromcoach manufacturers, with
an option to have propulsion equipment supplier as a sub contractor
Propulsion system comprises of Traction Motor, main converter-inverters, auxiliary

converters, transformers & TCMS. The propulsion system is quite crucial sub-system of
the train. Responsibilities of propulsion system supplier include:
Interfacing with other subsystems like ATC/ATO, Brake System, Signaling, Passenger
Information system, Power supply etc.

Propulsion system must comply with:
operating characteristics like acceleration/deceleration,
Energy efficiency,
System Reliability.
Safety
Availability
Advantages in sourcing from consortium
A consortium approach ensures that the Propulsion supplier is part of the consortium
and is committed to delivering his commitment as per the contractual obligations.Else
normally the suppliers may have a separate arrangement on warranty clauses/ reliability
clauses with the Rolling Stock bidders which may not be aligned with Contractual
requirements. This may create contractual issues during execution.
Advantages Non consortium approach
On the other side a non- consortium approach may allow certain bidders (who do not
manufacture propulsion equipment) to have enough negotiating power post contract.
This will reduce the price.
Non consortium approach will help Metros in getting more competitive prices, without
compromising with quality. Tender conditions will be required to clearly spell out the
responsibility of Propulsion supplier. In such cases entire responsibility for choosing
sub vendors etc will rest with the propulsion equipment supplier. For example BEML,
the coach manufacturer should have the option to go with Mitsubishi, Siemens or
Toshiba. Consortium approach will restrict the bids to number of Propulsion equipment
manufacturers.
Role of Propulsion supplier in the design, interfacing and testing is required to be

clearly defined in the Contract itself.
Committee recommends sub-contractor approach i.e. Non consortium approach for

reduction in price.
Alstom view:There are two critical issues that need to be considered by the Committee:
a) It has been witnessed in the recent tenders that there is one leading propulsion system
manufacturer, who, by virtue of the restrictive criteria (e.g. past experience in 25

kVACMRTS), is in effect, driving the entire MRTSmarket. In such a scenario, there is
every possibility of this manufacturer extracting monopoly rent from all metro train
builder/manufacturers and driving costs upwards.
b) It is reiterated that propulsion system, like the diesel engine of a diesel electric
locomotive, is central to the longevity, reliability and performance of the train. In case
the propulsion system supplier is a subcontractor, he will have no responsibility to
deliver the performance and RAMS over the life of the train.
In order to correct this situation, it is recommended that the propulsion system supplier
should be in the Joint Venture where the parties are responsible, jointly and severally,
overall train system performance.The emphasis should be to promote a number of
Propulsion suppliers through a more relaxed eligibility criteria for Propulsion System
Suppliers so that there are more firms who can form Joint Venture with different RS
builders. Also, given that the Propulsion System is at the heart of the Rolling
Stock/Trains, it is for consideration whether the three years should not be increased to
at least 5 years.
Item No.7 Control & communication protocol common/published
Terms of reference
Study of impact of use of vendor specific(proprietary) software/protocol for TCMS

on interoperability/use of subsystems of different makes as well as impact on cost of
rolling stock
Study of Control & Communication protocol Common/published

standard/standards for Train Control & Management System (TCMS) used by
different metros in India and abroad and provide suggestions/recommendations.
System used by Different Metros

Hyderabad Metro
Train integrated management system (TIMS) is a complete, integrated system for the
control and monitoring of the train-borne equipment. TIMS provides control and
monitoring, diagnostic and reporting of the train-borne equipment in a redundant
manner through the Train Bus (ARCNET) and Local bus (RS-485). The TIMS is
designed for ease of fault diagnosis and maintenance.
TIMS controls and monitors all non-safety critical systems and shall monitor vital or
safety critical systems.
Subsystems of the train utilize microprocessor-based control. The subsystems are
inter-linked via a communication data bus system for the monitoring, fault data
logging and for first line diagnostics of faults on board the train.
TIMS hardware system shall conform to International standard IEC 60571.
Bangalore Metro:

Train Control & Management system of M/s MELCO is presently based on
ARCNET technology (Standardized protocol defined by ANSIIATA878.1).
ARCNET is basically a Ladder type Train Bus.
Advantages of ARCNET:
1. Highly reliable with stored and forward method.
2. Ensure real-time control command data both by packet division and priority
control.
3. Conformity of IEC62280-1 (Safety related communication in closed
transmission systems)
4. Twisted Copper cable for ARCNET is easy to use. considering maintenance cost.
cost performance & Redundancy.
Suggestions and recommendations of Bangalore Metro:
TCMS with ARCNET technology supplied by MELCO is using Token

passing. HDLC (High Level Data link Control) frame format for Train
Bus Communication between the Cars (One TMS CPU to other Car
TMS CPU).
For communication from TCMS -Subsystem it is based on
RS485/RS422 protocol.
In IP technology with Ethernet back bone communication currently
CSMAlCD (Carrier Sense Multiple Access I Collision Detection) is
being used.
There is no problem to monitor different sub-systems of different sub-
suppliers; however it should be possible to meet the common protocol
between TCMS & respective sub-systems.
Also Transmission data flow in the network between TCMS & sub-
systems can be standardized, so that subsystem supplier of different
makes can meet the requirement of monitoring & control of the various
parameters through TCMS. Gradually sub-system supplier should adopt
IP technology.
As far as software is concerned, it is a vendor specific proprietary item
and during the Tendering stage, concerned contractors refused to share
the source code with BMRCL and subsequently this requirement was
modified.
BT Comments:
TCMS is critical for train operation, reliability and safety. Train builders and equipment
suppliers use different solutions and protocols; normally supplier specific hardware and
common network solutions and protocols, such as MVB, CAN, Ethernet. Requirements
need to be of functional type while flexibility is provided for type of solutions.
The common standard for the TCMS is defined by IEC 61375 series of standards.

Alstom Comments: It is important that there is adherence to globally accepted standards
like IEC. The Standards must be based on functionality rather than specific protocols. All
protocols that adhere to the International Standard should be permitted and should not be
restricted to standards employed by limited manufacturers as this would limit
competition.
Item No.8 Driver less control

Terms of reference
Collection of data regarding metros having driverless train operation and study of the
same for adoption in metros in India.
Driverless Train Operation Main Features

Driverless operation
- Automatic departure and run from station to station, including automatic turn-back
- Door re-opening on train hold command
- Remote start of stalled trains
- control passenger doors
- prevent person injuries between cars or between platform and train
- ensure safe starting conditions
- set in/set off operation
- supervise the status of the train
Basic technical system requirements for driverless operation
- Continuous, bi-directional communication between trackside / OCC and trains (= CBTC

system).
- Platform Screen Doors, radar grid or optical obstacle detection systems for sealing the
guide way in the platform areas and along the alignment in case of elevated systems.
- Highly reliable Rolling Stock sub-systems.
Obstacle detection equipment on bogies
- Derailment detection on bogie axles.

- Door nip protection equipment on all train doors.
- Complete CCTV coverage on trains and two-way passenger help points.
- Onboard fire, smoke and temperature detection equipment in passenger compartments
and inside the equipment cabinets.
LT HMR
Hyderabad Metro evaluated about driverless system but in absence of CBTC system
decision, this decision could not be taken (driverless system requires CBTC) Hyderabad
Metro operation/signaling concept is

STO Semi-automated Train Operation where
train runs automatically from station to station
automatic stop and door opening
train operated by a driver supported by ATO
driverless reversal to meet 90 seconds headway at terminal stations
Recommendations

- Driverless system is the technology, which is well proven now and is strongly
recommended for use in Indian Metro system.
- Techno-Commercials considerations are in favour of driver-less system as extra capex
can be recovered in 7-10 years time.
- Driverless system needs very high reliability and hence detailed designs requires extra
time in RAM assurance activities.
- Approval and safety certificate from CRS due to lack of technical experience, which can
probably be managed.
Driver less operation is required to achieve 90 seconds frequency for full utilization of
Metro infrastructure capacity. This will require communication based Train Control
(CBTC) system.
"Driverless" Train Operation can be adopted in phases with signaling up-gradation.
Alstom Comments: The RS supplier must have proven experience in having

successfully supplied and commissioned Driverless Trains in at least 2 countries and the
Driverless Trains must be successfully running for at least 3 years in these two
references.

Item No.9 Indigenization
Terms of reference
Identifying constraints in process of indigenous development and evolving strategy for

placing development orders for assemblies/systems/subsystems.
Recommend appropriate eligibility/qualification criteria for wider competition and

phased Indigenization in a planned manner without diluting quality.
Indigenous Development: Present Approach being adopted by Metros in India
Standard clause in Metro Tenders mandates that the successful bidder will set up car
manufacturing unit in India and at least 70% of the quantity be produced indigenously. This has
led to BEML developing facilities for Metro car production and BT and Alstom setting up their
manufacturing units in India. M/S CAF is also likely to set up a manufacturing unit in India.
Merits and demerits of this arrangement
Cost of procurement of rolling stock goes up

IPR is retained by global bidder only the manufacturing base is shifted
No reduction in bid price even in subsequent bids, example is BMRCL procurement,
KMRCL and CMRCL procurement all have gone to new bidders.
No development of Indigenous Industry.
Simple components, are only procured from local industry.
Private developers like GMRL, Reliance Metro,Mumbai, Airport Express and LTHMRL have
not imposed any condition for indigenous development and entire stock has been procured from
Hyundai-Rotem, South Korea and CSR, China.
For true development of Indigenous sources for 3 phase Metro cars, it is necessary that some
development orders be given to indigenous sources for complete propulsion equipment, with
stringent performance requirements. IR has successfully adopted this approach for indigenous
development of 3 phase propulsion equipment for locos for production at CLW. Initiative can be
taken by MOUD as is done by Ministry of Railways for IR. This will help in Indian firms
acquiring technology thorough collaborations or indigenous development on their own.
Air conditioned Metro rakes for Kolkata(though with conventional DC Motors) were produced
completely indigenously with support from Indian Industry, with number of advanced features.
Further for development of Indian Industry, it is necessary that eligibility criteria enables
sourcing from Indigenous manufacturers without imposing conditions like proven-ness in two or
three countries as indigenous industry will never qualify with those conditions.

Alstom Comments: It would be incorrect to state that indigenous manufacture of Metro Rolling
Stock/Trains would automatically lead to higher cost of production. This situation arises when
tender evaluation of rolling stock is undertaken without including taxes and duties.However, the
moment the evaluation is based on landed cost to the customer, the situation completely changes
with indigenous rolling stock/trains having a lower in landed cost at the customer level.
It is felt that the correct approach of tender evaluation should be to include the entire taxes and
duties - basic custom duty (BCD), countervailing duty (CVD), Cess on CVD and the Special
Additional duty (SAD) - to arrive at the total landed cost of the Rolling Stock at the MRTS
Depot. From the standpoint of the customer, the cash outflow would be lower for indigenously
manufactured trains. Going forward, as more localization happens, the landed cost of
manufacturing of trains and their sub-systems/components, including domestically manufactured
spares will reduce drastically over the life of the train, thus giving a clear benefit on the lift cycle
cost. In summary, Public Authority must evaluate tenders based on landed costs and this in itself,
will promote reduction in costs as a result of localization of design and manufacturing. This in
turn will push many Global Companies to set up set up local manufacturing facility under a
separate locally incorporated company in order to reduce costs.
With the clear support of Public Metros Authorities such as DMRC, BMRCL, CMRL and Metro
Kolkata (Indian Railways), a large number of reputed major train builders have set up
manufacturing in India. In the next phase, the emphasis should be on indigenization of
propulsion system & TCMS which, so far, has been trailing behind the localization curve. As a
result, there is heavy dependence on foreign imports and this has a long term detrimental impact
of the foreign exchange reserves. The situation gets further aggravated in a scenario where there
is only one dominant supplier of propulsion system. There is also a view that the current
arrangement for calling tenders (RFQ and RFP) in which suppliers of propulsion system are kept
out of the consortium, is adversely affecting the level of competition as explained in our
comments in Item no.6, above. It would therefore, be prudent to aggressively push for and
support moves towards 100% indigenization and indigenous procurement of the entire Rolling
Stock, including Propulsion Systems. This would also encourage more FDI to come in to India.
Further, it respect of Rolling Stock for Metro, it is felt that all bidders who have invested heavily
in India in the form of manufacturing facilities have in effect, brought in FDI, generated
employment, and helped train local manpower in cutting edge technology. The Government must
ensure that these investments are well protected. As India urbanises and more metros are added,
Government of India must initiate steps to ensure that these manufacturing facilities have a
steady stream of order intake.Such a step will encourage further FDI through expansion of
existing factories and introduction of new manufacturing units. Over time, this will also result in
cost reduction through improved localization. It will also reduce cost of spares and maintenance
of the Metro Trains over their economic life cycle.
It is therefore proposed that:

I. A central Rolling Stock Procurement Agency that procures on behalf of all Metros
Authorities in the country be set up. This will ensure that there is a clear visibility
of requirements and allow global companies to plan their long term strategy better.
II. Currently, many of the manufacturing facilities that were set up in anticipation of
obtaining orders are challenged with low off-take, and with a winner takes it all
approach especially in very big tenders of more than 250 cars, in which bulk orders
end up with a single supplier. This is what was witnessed in the recent RS10 tender
of DMRC Phase III.Such big tenders of more than 250 cars should be contracted to
more than one supplier.
III. Similarly, awarding contracts on the existing supplier on single bid basis also
hampers competition & competitiveness and increase the cost. For example in
Jaipur Metro where RS was awarded on single bid basis to BEML whereas for
Signaling there was an open tender.
IV. There is a need to correct this situation by incentivizing procurement from
firmsthat have an installed manufacturing base in India.
V. Tender Evaluation should be based on the landed cost, inclusive of Taxes & Duties.

Report 2 Rolling Stock - MOUD INDIA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Report 2 Rolling Stock - MOUD INDIA

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Report 2 Rolling Stock - MOUD INDIA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT

REPORT OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE

3. Accordingly following Sub-Committees for various systems were constituted by

4. The Sub-committee on Rolling Stock has following members:

(ii) Emergency evacuation system

(iii) Coupling arrangement (Automatic, semi-automatic etc.)

(iv) Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rate, Power to weight ratio/ % motorization

(v) Eligibility/qualification criteria for procurement

(vi) Propulsion Single source or consortium/JV approach.

(vii) Control & communication protocol common/published standard/standards

(viii) Driverless Operation

2.0 TERMS OF REFERENCE 21

3.0 NOISE AND VIBRATION LEVEL 23

5.0 Coupling arrangement (Automatic, semi-automatic etc.) 49

6.1 Percentage Motorisation 53

7.0 Propulsion Single source or consortium/JV 61

8.0 Eligibility/qualification criteria for procurement 65

8.2 Views based on experience of Indian Metros 67

9.0 Control & communication protocol common/published 73

10.0 Driver less control 77

1.1 Noise and Oscillation Level

Permissible Daily Noise exposure levels prescribed by US Environmental

The Ancient Monuments and Archaelogical Sites and Remains (Amendment

Study of Noise assessment inside the Greater Cairo Underground Metro - By

RIVAS Railway Induced Vibration Abatement Solutions Collaborative project

Interim guidelines for Assessment of noise from Tail infrastructure projects-

Delhi Metro Report on Train Noise Level Study by Rupert Taylor

DMRC Train Noise Level Study RS1 by GC Report dated 7.06.2005

(1) The frequency-weighted exposure level, measured in A-weighted decibels

(2) The exposure duration

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1974 and World Health

A weighted LAeq is considered to be most suitable for predicting general annoyance

Recommended Noise Levels

Measurement of Internal coach noiseLaeq be done as per ISO 3381:2011(or latest)

Design of the track, more precisely the properties of the track

Wheel / rail surface quality, roughness incl. corrugation, out-of-roundness,

1.2 Emergency Evacuation System

Side Evacuation system

Front Evacuation System

1) In case of DC third rail system evacuation is faster as switching off of power to

Fully Automatic Mechanical, Pneumatic and Electrical coupler

Automatic Mechanical and Pneumatic coupling and Jumper cables (IV

1. For two ends of the train:

2. Between coaches of the same basic unit:

3. Between two basic units:

1.4 Percentage Motorisation, Acceleration/Deceleration/Jerk Rate, Power to

1.4.1 Percentage Motorisation

4 Car unit/8 Car trains

In case of 6 car/9car, 66% motorization is a better option on account of following

Smaller Traction Motor

Higher level of acceleration and declaration is possible, subject to adhesion

Higher regeneration level is achieved resulting in lower application of friction

Energy efficiency is better

Number of pantographs in 25 KV AC systems will go up. This can however

Characteristic 50% Powering 66% Powering

Maximum Design speed 95kmph 95 kmph

Maximum operating speed 85kmph 85kmph