Computer-controlled Vehicle System

Last updated

The Computer-controlled Vehicle System, almost universally referred to as CVS, was a personal rapid transit (PRT) system developed by a Japanese industrial consortium during the 1970s. Like most PRT systems under design at the same time, CVS was based around a small four-person electric vehicle similar to a small minivan that could be requested on demand and drive directly to the user's destination. Unlike other PRT systems, however, CVS also offered cargo vehicles, included "dual-use" designs that could be manually driven off the PRT network, and included the ability to stop at intersections in a conventional road-like network.

Contents

Work on CVS started in the late 1960s as a demonstration system for a "traffic game" at Expo '70. This demonstration was successful and led to a further development project in 1970, which expanded several times and eventually produced a large test track outside of Tokyo. However, in 1978, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport declined to grant CVS a license under existing safety regulations, citing issues with the short headway distances. As other proposed CVS deployments also dried up, work on the project ended some time that year.

History

Background

The concept of personal rapid transit (PRT) developed in the 1950s as a solution to the problem of providing mass transit in smaller urban areas and the suburbs of larger cities. Existing systems, heavy rail and subways, required major infrastructure and had high capital costs that limited their use to only the densest urban areas. Buses could run on existing roadways, but were thus subject to traffic problems and could not offer the high-speed services that made subways so attractive to riders. Modern PRT really began around 1953 when Donn Fichter, a city transportation planner, began research on PRT and alternative transportation methods. In 1964, Fichter published a book, [1] which proposed an automated public transit system for areas of medium to low population density.

The solution appeared to be a "mini-subway", one that was small enough that the routes did not require the same sort of capital costs as a conventional system. However, using traditional technology to implement such a system would not work, as the required distance between vehicles on a subway system, known as headway, was often several minutes. [2] This would mean a low vehicle density, and, if this was combined with a small number of passengers per vehicle, a very low overall passenger capacity. If such a system was to be practical, the distance between the vehicles had to be reduced, something that the emerging computer market appeared able to address.

During the 1950s the United States underwent a period of intense urban decay. [3] Planners pointed to the construction of the interstate highway system as the culprit; people were able to buy houses at low prices farther and farther from their jobs in the downtown cores, leading to a flight of capital out of the cities. Only those cities with well-developed mass transit systems, like New York and Boston, seemed to be avoiding these problems. If mass transit was the solution, there was a need for a system that could be built in smaller cities at reasonable prices. This led, naturally, to the PRT concept.

PRT development was given a major boost in 1967 with the start of what would be delivered as the "HUD reports", a series of industry studies funded by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which gave strong support to the PRT concept. The publication of the reports in 1968 as Tomorrow's Transportation sparked off a wave of developments around the world, as it appeared PRT was going to be "the next big thing". [4] By the early 1960s there were dozens of PRT efforts underway, with a wide variety of solutions from what were essentially small subway systems to more complex systems that the HUD reports referred to as "dial-a-cab".

Traffic Game

As part of the Expo '70 program in Osaka, starting in 1968 a university and industry team built a "traffic game" in the Automobile Industries Pavilion. The network consisted of a grid of guideways on a 5 m grid carrying ten two-seat electrically powered cars. The cars communicated with a central computer using wires under the "roadway", which allowed the computer to start and stop the vehicles at the intersections if there was crossing traffic. [5] If there wasn't, the vehicles could travel through the intersection non-stop. This greatly increases passenger throughput by eliminating unneeded stops that occur on a fixed-schedule system (like traffic lights), increasing the average vehicle speed.

In spite of being a show floor demonstration system, the system was quite advanced compared to most PRT systems then under study. [5] Most systems had been designed in the era of Generation II computers (the PDP-8 was common), which were large and relatively slow. These systems normally limited themselves to planning the route in a fixed network with no stops, which greatly simplified the routing task. Vehicles on the network were assumed to be running at a fixed speed or stopped completely in emergencies, there were no on-route stops that could complicate timing. This meant that the guideway network could not be built into existing infrastructure like roads where there are stops at crossing points along the route, stations had to be built "off-line" to allow other vehicles to pass by at full speed.

The "traffic game" demonstration system was much more flexible. The computer system knew the location of all of the vehicles at all times, and was able to speed up and slow down vehicles as needed at fixed points in the network. [5] This meant the guideway system could be built in a fashion much more similar to conventional roadways, without the need to separate tracks at crossing points, or building offline stations. Although these types of infrastructure would improve performance of the system, in areas of less demand or traffic they could be eliminated to save on capital costs.

When the "traffic game" was system successful the designers suggested that a similar but more complex system be presented at the 18th Tokyo Motor Show late in 1971. A formal presentation was submitted to the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) in July 1970, and accepted that autumn. Built between April and October 1971, the new system used 1:20th scale cars on a network representing the 300 m wide area of the Ginza district in Tokyo, with the centralized computer system able to control up to 1,000 vehicles. [5]

CVS

Following the successful demonstration at the Tokyo Motor Show, MITI provided funding for development of a full-sized version of the same system at Higashimurayama, built on top of an existing car test track and former racetrack. [5] [6] Several other Japanese companies were already in the process of developing PRT systems, either self-designed or using licensed US designs, but the "traffic game" design, with its crossing guideway network and ability to deal with traffic made it uniquely advanced. [5]

Basic track layout was completed by the middle of 1972 and construction of the short guideway section for the maintenance yard was completed by that autumn. Testing of frameless chassis started soon after. Construction of the rest of the track was completed by the autumn of 1973. [7] The test track was 2 km long and about 200 m across, in the form of a large oval loop. In the center of the loop was a grid of crossing lines and several passenger stations at a 100 m spread, along with the maintenance and control facilities. The top portion of the loop was used for high-speed tests, while the bottom included two parallel tracks for lane-changing experiments. [8] In total, the track contained 4.8 km of guideway. [7]

The system originally envisioned a 100-vehicle mixed fleet, but rampant inflation in the 1970s led to budget cutbacks that were made good by reducing the fleet to 60. [8] The basic passenger vehicle emerged as a four-person design that looked like a minivan with no "hood" area for the engine. Since the emergency braking was extremely powerful, passengers were seated facing to the rear, and Japanese law already precluded standing in automated vehicles. [9] In some versions, two of the four seats could be folded to allow larger loads, like prams or bicycles. CVS also tested light cargo vehicles, carrying between 300 and 400 kg. Three types of cargo bodies were tried; a flatbed version for palleted cargo that was loaded using two conveyor belts on a trackside "station", another was similar to a pickup truck with a box end, and the last was an enclosed postal van. [9]

CVS also developed a dual-mode version of the vehicle, which they demonstrated at Expo '75 on Okinawa in July 1975. This version allowed potential customers to purchase a vehicle and drive it like a normal car for short distances at low speeds using battery power. For longer distances and higher speeds, the car would be driven onto the guideway, which would provide the higher power and automated guidance needed for higher speeds. [5] Expo also hosted a larger group rapid transit system from Kobe Steel, which was a licensed version of the Alden staRRcar being built by Boeing Vertol. [10] [11]

Cancellation

A two-phase testing program was carried out. Phase I was the basic construction and operation at various speeds with large headways, in order to work on the mechanical design. This phase completed in 1976, and was followed by Phase II, a "system demonstration" at one-second headways (considerably less than a car). Phase II testing completed in 1978 and the consortium started looking for deployment opportunities, developing a serious proposal for an installation in Baltimore. [12]

However, CVS ran into the same difficulties as the many other PRT systems of the era. A combination of lowering gas prices, changes in attitudes toward major public projects of this size, and cost overruns in the demonstration system in Morgantown, and a lack of progress within the Urban Mass Transit Administration in the US all led to a souring of opinion for PRT systems. For example, the California Public Utilities Commission states that its rail regulations apply to PRT, and these require railway-sized headways. [13] [14] The degree to which CPUC would hold PRT to "light rail" and "rail fixed guideway" safety standards is not clear because it can grant particular exemptions and revise regulations. [15] Although by this point in time there were numerous fully developed systems ready to be installed, a lack of interest and funding meant no new PRT systems were installed, and only the much larger Canadian Bombardier ART and French VAL systems saw any deployment projects during the 1980s.

J. Edward Anderson, a long-time PRT advocate and critic, noted that the guideway was very large and had a major visual impact. However, many other systems used similar or larger guideways, including the Morgantown PRT, and the guideway was smaller than a conventional roadway. [16] He also noted that the stations only had a single berth, which would limit capacity, and that the vehicles had a rough ride (they were unsprung). [12]

Description

CVS vehicles were built like contemporary vans, with a chassis holding the mechanical systems with a metal monocoque body placed on top. They were 3 m long, 1.6 wide and 1.85 high, and weighted about 1 ton. [7] Motive power was provided by a conventional 200 VAC electric motor driving the rear wheels, which also provided regenerative braking at up to 0.2 G. Conventional brakes could increase this to 0.4 G. Emergency stopping at up to 2 G could be provided through an explosively fired device. The standard four-seat passenger vehicle weighed 2000 lbs. [17]

The guideway consisted of parallel steel I-beams providing the running surface, with a third steel channel running down the middle of the two providing the guide rail, emergency stopping surface, vehicle power and communications. Due to the rubber-on-steel running surfaces, the maximum climbing grade was about 10 degrees, and would be reduced in wet or snowy weather. In good weather the vehicles normally ran at 40 km/h in the low-speed sections, but could run as high as 80 km/h in high-speed sections. [17]

Vehicle control used a moving block control system, similar to those used on automated railways. Each vehicle had a small computer on board that communicated with the external scheduling systems every 1/2 second or less, sending in its current position with a resolution of less than 2 m. The position was measured by small spiral antennas running in the guide track, which also send position information to the scheduling computers at 1,200 bit/s over an inductive loop in the track. [18]

In addition to the "quantum" computers on the vehicles, three separate control systems were tested; Hitachi built a system for control at high speed on the outer loop based on a HIDIC-350 computer, allowing speeds up to 60 km/h, Toshiba provided a system based on the TOSBAC-40 that ran the lower-speed network area at speeds under 40 km/h, and Fujitsu added a third system based on the FACOM 230-35 that supervised the other two and switched traffic between them. [6] [8]

Vehicles normally operated at a one-second headway, meaning a single lane could carry as many as 3,600 vehicles per hour, for 14,400 seats per hour. [17] In operation it was expected to operate at about 1/3 this capacity. [16] This placed CVS right in the middle of the PRT/GRT spectrum, between busses that normally deliver about 3,000 passengers per hour per direction (pphph) and conventional subways which operate around 50,000 pphpd.

Bibliography

Notes

  1. ↑ Fichter 1964
  2. ↑ Boyle 2006 , p. 13
  3. ↑ Bradbury-Downs-Small 1982, p. 28. - "Ninety-five percent of cities with populations greater than 100,000 people in the U.S. lost population between 1970 and 1975."
  4. ↑ Haar-Cole-Merritt 1968
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 AGT 1975 , p. 250
  6. 1 2 Ishii-Iguchi-Koshi 1975, p. 77.
  7. 1 2 3 Ishii-Iguchi-Koshi 1975, p. 78.
  8. 1 2 3 AGT 1975 , p. 251
  9. 1 2 AGT 1975 , p. 252
  10. ↑ AGT 1975 , p. 257
  11. ↑ "Expo '75 - Publicity Photos" . Retrieved 7 July 2021.
  12. 1 2 Anderson, John Edward (August 4, 1996). "Some Lessons from the History of Personal Rapid Transit". pub. Retrieved December 26, 2009.
  13. ↑ California: "Safety Rules and Regulations Governing Light Rail Transit" (General Order 143-B) Archived 2009-12-31 at the Wayback Machine
  14. ↑ California: "Rules and Regulations Governing State Safety Oversight of Rail Fixed Guideway Systems" (General Order 164-D) Archived 2009-12-31 at the Wayback Machine
  15. ↑ California General Order 164-D, ibid. Sections 1.3,1.4
  16. 1 2 Ishii-Iguchi-Koshi 1975, p. 82.
  17. 1 2 3 AGT 1975 , p. 253
  18. ↑ Ishii-Iguchi-Koshi 1975, p. 81.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Personal rapid transit</span> Public transport mode

Personal rapid transit (PRT), also referred to as podcars or guided/railed taxis, is a public transport mode featuring a network of specially built guideways on which ride small automated vehicles that carry few passengers per vehicle. PRT is a type of automated guideway transit (AGT), a class of system which also includes larger vehicles all the way to small subway systems. In terms of routing, it tends towards personal public transport systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">People mover</span> Fully automated transit systems, generally serving relatively small areas

A people mover or automated people mover (APM) is a type of small scale automated guideway transit system. The term is generally used only to describe systems serving relatively small areas such as airports, downtown districts or theme parks.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Automated guideway transit</span> Fully automated transit system

An automated guideway transit (AGT) or automated fixed-guideway transit or automatic guideway transit system is a type of fixed guideway transit infrastructure with a riding or suspension track that supports and physically guides one or more driverless vehicles along its length. The vehicles are often rubber tired or steel wheeled, but other traction systems including air cushion, suspended monorail and maglev have been implemented. The guideway provides both physical support, like a road, as well as the guidance. An automated line can be cheaper to run than a conventional line, due to the shorter trains and stations.

Various terms are used for passenger railway lines and equipment; the usage of these terms differs substantially between areas:

Cabinentaxi, sometimes Cabintaxi in English, was a German people mover development project undertaken by Demag and Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm with funding and support from the Bundesministerium für Forschung und Technologie. Cabinentaxi was designed to offer low-cost mass transit services where conventional systems, like a metro, would be too expensive to deploy due to low ridership or high capital costs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Morgantown Personal Rapid Transit</span> Personal rapid transit system in Morgantown, West Virginia

Morgantown Personal Rapid Transit is a personal rapid transit (PRT) system in Morgantown, West Virginia, United States. The system connects the three Morgantown campuses of West Virginia University (WVU) and the city's downtown area.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ultra (personal rapid transit)</span> Personal rapid transit system

Ultra is a personal rapid transit podcar system developed by the British engineering company Ultra Global PRT.

Headway is the distance or duration between vehicles in a transit system measured in space or time. The minimum headway is the shortest such distance or time achievable by a system without a reduction in the speed of vehicles. The precise definition varies depending on the application, but it is most commonly measured as the distance from the tip of one vehicle to the tip of the next one behind it. It can be expressed as the distance between vehicles, or as time it will take for the trailing vehicle to cover that distance. A "shorter" headway signifies closer spacing between the vehicles. Airplanes operate with headways measured in hours or days, freight trains and commuter rail systems might have headways measured in parts of an hour, metro and light rail systems operate with headways on the order of 90 seconds to 20 minutes, and vehicles on a freeway can have as little as 2 seconds headway between them.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Transpo '72</span>

U.S. International Transportation Exposition, better known as Transpo '72, was a trade show held on 300 acres (1.2 km2) of land at Dulles International Airport outside Washington, D.C., for nine days from May 27 to June 4, 1972. The $10 million event, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Transportation, was a showcase for all sorts of transportation-related technologies. Over a million visitors flocked to the show from all over the world. According to the Wall Street Journal, it was "the biggest show the government has put on since World War II."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Vought Airtrans</span> Former automated people mover at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport

LTV's (Vought) Airtrans was an automated people mover system that operated at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport between 1974 and 2005. The adaptable people mover was utilized for several separate systems: the Airport Train, Employee Train, American Airlines TrAAin and utility service. All systems utilized the same guideways and vehicle base but served different stations to create various routes.

The ACT, acronym for Automatically Controlled Transportation or Activity Center Transit, was a people mover system developed during the 1970s. One feature of the ACT is that it allowed bi-directional travel on a single rail—cars passed each other by switching onto short bypass lanes on the track, distributed where space allowed. ACT was a contender in the Urban Mass Transportation Administration's plan to deploy three or four systems in cities in the United States, as well as the GO-Urban project in Toronto, Canada. One ACT system was installed as a part of a Ford-funded real estate development near their headquarters in Dearborn, MI, and although they proposed to install ACT in several other locations, no additional systems were ever installed and the project was put on indefinite hold.

The Alden staRRcar, short for "Self-Transport Road and Rail Car", was a personal rapid transit (PRT) system designed by William Alden in the 1960s. It originally envisioned small electrically powered cars suitable for short distance trips at low speed within urban areas, which could optionally merge onto tracks that would provide power and guidance for high-speed travel over longer inter-city distances. It was one of the earliest dual-mode vehicles to be proposed, and one of the earliest to be actually built.

ROMAG was a personal rapid transit (PRT) system produced by the American company Rohr, Inc. It featured a linear induction motor that was arranged to provide both traction and suspension in a magnetic levitation system.

The HUD Reports were a series of studies in mass transit systems, funded by the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) department of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The HUD reports were extremely influential in the development of the personal rapid transit (PRT) concept, small pod-like vehicles that automatically travel from point-to-point in extended networks. Their publication in early 1968 sparked off PRT development projects at dozens of companies around the world. In spite of intense interest in the early 1970s, political winds shifted and today there is only one HUD-inspired PRT system in commercial operation, the Morgantown PRT in West Virginia.

Krauss-Maffei's Transurban was a 12-passenger automated guideway transit (AGT) mass transit system based on a maglev guideway. Development started in 1970 as one of the many AGT and PRT projects that followed in the wake of the HUD reports of 1968. Its selection as the basis of the GO-Urban system in Toronto in 1973 made it well known in the industry; it would have been the basis of the first large-area AGT mass transit network in the world. Technical problems cropped up during the construction of the test track, and the sudden removal of funding by the West German government led to the project's cancellation in late 1974. The Ontario government completed development and installation of a non-maglev version, today known as the Bombardier Advanced Rapid Transit.

GO-Urban was a planned mass transit project for Greater Toronto to be operated by GO Transit. The system envisioned the use of automated guideway transit vehicles set up in hydro corridors and other unused parcels of land to provide rapid transit services without the expense of constructing tunnels. GO-Urban would serve high-density areas in the downtown core, but also be able to accelerate to high speed between distant stations in the outskirts of the city. Similar deployments were planned for Hamilton and Ottawa.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dashaveyor</span> Automated guideway transit (AGT) system developed during the 1960s and 70s

The Dashaveyor was an automated guideway transit (AGT) system developed during the 1960s and '70s.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">UP Diliman Automated Guideway Transit System</span>

The University of the Philippines Diliman AGT was an automated guideway transit (AGT) system constructed for technology demonstration within the campus of the University of the Philippines (UP) in Diliman, Quezon City in the Philippines. It served as a test track for the first mass transit system to be built and developed in the country by local engineers.

Minitram was an automated guideway transit system studied by the Transport and Road Research Laboratory (TRRL), part of the UK Department of the Environment's Ministry of Transport. The system was based on small, completely automated tram-like vehicles of about 25 passengers that could be connected together into three-car trains to increase capacity. Proposed designs were submitted by Hawker Siddeley Dynamics (HSD) and EASAMS. HSD's system used rubber wheels and EASAMS' steerable steel ones, but the projects were otherwise similar and notably shared a linear motor for propulsion and most braking. A series of failed sales efforts in the UK and to the GO-Urban system in Toronto, combined with decreased government spending in the 1970s, led to the concept being abandoned.

In the 1990s, the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) planned to fund the construction of a personal rapid transit (PRT) system in Rosemont, Illinois. Raytheon had been contracted to build the system. The project was cancelled in October 1999. Rosemont had been selected in 1993 by the RTA be home to a demonstration PRT system. Five other municipalities in the suburban Chicago metropolitan area had submitted unsuccessful bids to be host to the PRT project. The system would have been the first-of-its-kind, utilizing smaller vehicles than the existing Morgantown Personal Rapid Transit. The project marked the first serious activity related to PRT construction since Morgantown Personal Rapid Transit.

References

  • AGT, United States Congress Office of Technology Assessment (May 1975). Automated Guideway Transit: An Assessment of PRT and Other New Systems (1975 ed.). United States Congress Office of Technology Assessment. ISBN   1-4289-2517-1.
  • Boyle, Daniel K. (2006). Fixed-Route Transit Ridership Forecasting and Service Planning Methods (2006 ed.). Transportation Research Board National Resear. ISBN   0-309-09772-X.- Total pages: 50
  • Bradbury, Katharine L.; Downs, Anthony ; Small, Kenneth A. (January 1982). Urban decline and the future of American cities (1982 ed.). Brookings Institution Press. ISBN   0-8157-1053-4.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)- Total pages: 309
  • Fichter, Donn (1964). Individualized Automatic Transit and the City (1964 ed.). Providence, RI.- Total pages: 162
  • Haar, Charles; Cole, Leon ; Merritt, Harold. Tomorrow's Transportation: New Systems for the Urban Future (PDF) (May, 1968 ed.). U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  • Ishii, Takemochi; Iguchi, Masakazu ; Koshi, Masaki & Translated by Yamashita, Akita. CVS: Computer-controlled Vehicle System (PDF) (1975 ed.). Reports of the Third International PRT Conference. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-08-03. Retrieved 2009-12-20.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)- pg. 77-83
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.