By Brendan Andrews

High-power ultracapacitors provide the burst power required by high current demands associated with acceleration, starting, steering and regeneration.

A number of factors in play for engineers considering hybridized energy storage may raise questions over the complexities and of increased costs for dual-storage systems. The electronics required for balancing separate batteries and ultracapacitors in one component may also be a concern. The decision makers might also point to the timeline as a potential drawback for a hybridized energy storage solution.

Nonetheless, considering the numerous and significant benefits to pairing traditional batteries with ultracapacitors optimized for higher voltage levels, the value of hybridization becomes very clear and compelling.

There are essentially seven reasons to embrace hybridized storage:

1. Cost — This is often the number-one concern with any change in manufacturing practice, so let’s address it first. In this category, ultracapacitors win big. The price of these components has fallen 99 percent in the past decade, while battery costs have come down only 30 to 40 percent in the same time period.

2. Power — Ultracapacitors allow design engineers to separate energy and power needs. In most applications there is a continuous energy demand that is handled by a primary energy source. At times, there are peak power demands. Engineers can either size the batteries to handle peak demands or use ultracapacitors to bridge the demand, which has the added benefit of being able to downsize the primary energy source.

High-power ultracapacitors provide the burst power required by high current demands associated with acceleration, starting, steering and regeneration. The industry has widely recognized that pairing a capacitor with a battery will improve the power density of the hybrid supply, which has the added advantage of allowing the battery to operate without seeing the large current spikes that would be present in the absence of the capacitor.

3. Temperature — Where batteries lose most of their available energy at 0-degrees and below, ultracapacitors perform under a wide range of climate conditions, typically from plus-70 degrees to minus-40 degrees Celsius. For batteries, the temperature range is best from minus-40 to plus-65, with the average type from minus-20 to plus-60.

4. Cycle life — Batteries rely on a chemical reaction to dissipate stored energy. There is no chemical reaction in ultracapacitors, as they store energy in an electrostatic field. This lack of chemical change is the reason that ultracapacitors will last more than a million cycles, versus the hundreds to low thousands of cycles for various batteries.

5. Efficiency — Ultracapacitors are 95 to 98 percent efficient, whereas lead-acid batteries measure, at best, 70 percent efficiency. Ultracapacitors can begin to accept a charge from zero volts, while batteries require the input to reach a certain voltage before accepting a charge. Also, one can discharge an ultracapacitor to zero volts, which would destroy a battery.

6. Better battery performance — Batteries are designed and built to provide high-energy density, and do a much better job of this when they are used in conjunction with ultracapacitors. designed for, which is For example, when a hybrid vehicle accelerates, there is a huge demand for power in the form of amps (current). Putting ultracapacitors in parallel with batteries along with control electronics allows ultracapacitors to provide high current, enabling the batteries to become strictly an energy source, rather than an energy and power source. The hybridized energy storage system then works together, forming an energy-dense, high-power solution with long life and increased reliability. This combination can also decrease the warranty and replacement cost of the batteries, making the system economically attractive.

7. Hybridization increases battery life — In many applications, ultracapacitors will not replace batteries. But since ultracapacitors have a much lower internal resistance and much faster charge rate, they make battery-powered systems run more efficiently. Ultracapacitors make batteries last longer because they do the brunt of the work when the load is initially switched on and allow the battery to pick up load gradually, preventing high current draws from the battery. By gradually taking on a load, batteries are insulated from high current drains that cause thermal, chemical, and mechanical stresses. By reducing current spikes, the internal temperature of batteries is decreased substantially, extending the life of the batteries by as much as 400 percent, depending on the application. Additionally, there are times when a battery simply cannot deliver the current needed for an application.

The ability to prevent the battery from experiencing these large current demands under load allows the battery to have a longer effective life. A typical starter battery, for example, will degrade quickly if it is required to supply high current for any length of time. So-called deep cycle batteries are designed specifically to supply higher currents, but even such batteries with their thicker lead plates are not immune from damage due to repeated deep cycling. A parallel configuration of a battery with an ultracapacitor can dramatically reduce the deep cycling of the battery under heavy load conditions and thus extend the life of the hybrid power supply as well as provide a more efficient supply.

Why hybridize?
Combinations of ultracapacitors and batteries in energy storage systems can reduce the size, weight, and the number of batteries in a system. Such hybridized systems are more efficient and use fewer materials. They can also extend the cycle life of the battery component, which makes the whole system greener.

Furthermore, in nearly every conceivable category, hybridized energy storage offers advantages that dramatically outweigh the minimal drawbacks associated with pairing ultracapacitors and batteries. The beauty of hybridization is in the equal benefits delivered by both elements. An ultracapacitor enables the reduction of battery currents and cycling range, delivering a positive effect on overall lifespan and efficiency. When considered along with gains in power and energy capabilities, one can see the significant, measurable worth of hybridization. BR

Brendan Andrews serves as vice president, sales and marketing for Ioxus, Inc, Oneonta, NY. Previously, he served with Maxwell Technologies as director of sales and marketing, Americas.

By Ryan Mayrand

Model 8630 is a new PAR46 LED High/Low Headlight LED from J.W. Speaker that is applicable to the public transportation industry.

In LED lighting technology, Lumens are the standard unit of measure used to describe how well a light source will illuminate objects. Because operators typically rely on output to evaluate LED lights, many manufacturers prominently tout high lumen numbers on product literature. What they fail to clarify is these big numbers are actually the raw lumen output as opposed to the effective lumen output.

Raw lumen is theoretical
The raw lumen output of a light is actually a theoretical value rather than the actual measure of useful output of light. Manufacturers calculate the number of raw lumens by multiplying the number of LEDs in a light by their maximum output rating. For example, if a light uses 10 LEDs with a maximum output rating of 100 lumens, the raw lumen output would be 1,000 lumens (10 x 100 = 1,000). No photometric testing is necessary to come up with this number. The raw lumens metric is unreliable in evaluating LED lights. It does not take into account real world factors that can decrease the light output as much as 75 percent.

A couple of major factors contribute to decreases in light output. First are thermal losses. The hotter LEDs get, the less light they produce. LEDs powered for longer and longer periods of time typically heat up. In fact, it is not uncommon for LEDs to reach temperatures of over 212ºF (100ºC). So, it stands to reason that the light output of an LED when initially lit is cooler than when it has been on for 30 minutes and decreases under the heat.

LED manufacturers calculate their maximum output ratings by measuring the light output of the component after 25 milliseconds — the equivalent in duration to the burst of a flash bulb. Any operator who uses LED lighting for longer than 25 milliseconds at a time is going to see light output that is less than the raw lumen value. How much less depends on the thermal management of the light, but the loss is typically in the neighborhood of 10 to 25 percent.

Most raw lumen output figures also fail to take into account the current used to drive the LEDs. Driving a higher current through an LED will produce more light, but it also makes the LED hotter, which creates thermal losses and shortens the life of the product. When light travels through or reflects off materials, such as optics, lens and reflectors optics, it loses some of its intensity due to inherent losses internal to the material. Losses also occur at the surface as the light travels from air through the lens and back. Any light from optics, reflector optics or a lens will unavoidably fall victim to these losses. Couple these optical losses with assembly variations, and the result is an additional 20-50 percent decrease in light output that the raw lumen figure does not account for.

Effective Lumens
Raw lumens are a theoretical measure that fails to account for real world losses. The effective lumen output is an actual measurement of light output that does take into account all real world losses noted above. Measuring the effective lumen output of a light requires the use of high-tech photometry equipment. Because of the cost and expertise involved in conducting photometric testing, some manufacturers opt to cut corners and simply use the theoretical raw lumen numbers. This makes an apples-to-apples comparison between lights very difficult, resulting in consumers receiving less useable light than actually advertised.

This simple illustration depicts where the lumen output losses occur, as well as what percentage of loss they typically account for.

Here is a practical example: LED light No. 1 has an output rating of 2,000 raw lumens and 1,000 effective lumens. LED light No. 2 has an output rating of 3,000 raw lumens, but only 500 effective lumens. Based solely on raw lumens, No. 2 would be the clear choice. However, turn both lights on and light No. 1 would be twice as bright as light No. 2 because it has the higher effective lumen output.

It takes special engineering and manufacturing processes to minimize losses. Many lights may only produce an effective lumen output that is 25 percent of the raw lumen output, but many of ours have effective lumen outputs of as much as 50 to 60 percent. For example, the Model 8630 has a raw lumen output of 1,200, but an effective lumen output of 600-650.
To get the entire picture, J.W. Speaker encourages operators to challenge manufacturers and lighting sales reps to provide both the raw and the effective output numbers.

Ryan Mayrand is with the J.W. Speaker Corporation, Germantown, WI.

To keep corrosion under control, remove the corroded panel and replace it with a new panel patch. Photos courtesy of Chicago Sightseeing Company.

At one time or another every bus and motorcoach operator has issues with panel corrosion, which is largely due to water and road salt. Not only is the corroded metal unsightly, it creates more serious problems once water seeps in behind the panel.

At Chicago Sightseeing Company we do everything we can to keep our motorcoaches for a 20-year life cycle, which means adhering to our strategy to keep our vehicles in safe and good condition. Panel corrosion will always be a situation we, like all operators, must face and repair. Over the years we have come up with an easy and perhaps obvious solution to this problem.

The panels on most motorcoaches corrode at the “belt line” just above the baggage door top seam. In some designs a hard piece of trim, or in some cases a rubber trim, covers this belt line, which can trap and collect water over time, spawning the corrosion process.

To keep corrosion under control, it is necessary to remove the corroded panel and replace it with new material.

Start by removing all the trim in the area of the corrosion. Then grind the corroded area and clean with an air gun. Measure at least two inches above and to the sides of the exposed area to leave room for the patch. This leaves a smooth look and affords a substantial surface for riveting.

Do not worry about riveting to the already smooth side panel of the motorcoach. It already has a large hole due to corrosion and the patch and rivets look much better.

The galvanized sheet metal is usually .0330 of an inch thick and available at most body shop supply houses. The thickness of the replacement metal is important to ensure the panel can receive the stainless steel rivets and not become wavy when viewed from the side.

Once the patch is in place and secured to the side panel over the entire perimeter with the rivets, fill the heads of the pop rivets with caulk. Carefully and neatly wipe the excess from the head of each rivet for a clean look.

Next, outline the patch panel with masking tape as if you were to paint the panel. Locate the tape one quarter-inch above and to the sides of the patch edges to allow an area for caulk. Caulk all the edges of the new patch panel with primerless adhesion (QUAD/O.S.I.) synthetic rubber-type caulk. Avoid using the typical acrylic latex caulk due to the fact that IMRON paint normally does not adhere to acrylic well and over time will chip off from the caulk bead. After the caulk has “skinned” over, remove the tape and clean any excess caulk for the area. A neat caulk application gives the repair a proper look. Once the repair is complete and the caulk has properly cured for 24 hours, match paint the repaired section.

Caulk all the edges of the new patch panel with primerless adhesion (QUAD/O.S.I.) synthetic rubber type caulk.

Some people think they need to use the body filler known as Bondo to maintain the smooth appearance of the coach. The problem with Bondo is the corrosion does not stop, and after a while actually seeps through the Bondo and begins to show. Also, as the coach body flexes during normal operation, the Bondo begins to crack around the edge of the repair to the point where the Bondo patch becomes visible and very unsightly.

We have done this type of panel repair for over 15 years at Chicago Sightseeing, and with great success. If done properly this repair procedure will last the duration of the motorcoach. Additionally, since the motorcoach structure is semi-monocoque, the exterior panels of the vehicle are not load bearing. Therefore, there is no concern when drilling and riveting to the exterior of the vehicle.

Christopher W. Ferrone is president of Americoach Systems Inc., Glenview, IL, an engineering firm specializing in transportation, technology, analysis and safety.

By Larry Yohe

Greyhound Bus Lines provided and equipped a coach similar to this one to accommodate testing on front tire failures.

A front tire failure can cause the motorcoach to be either extremely difficult to control or uncontrollable entirely. There is always the possibility of a catastrophic accident. A careful examination of the variables and practices that affect the control of a motorcoach can reduce the incidence of front tire failures.

Those variables include the types of failure such as a delamination, blowout or slow loss of air, and the manner in which the tire comes apart. The power steering system and steering wheel size may come into play, as well as human factors that include alertness, skill and the physical strength of the driver.

Steering wheel size is a factor
Power steering force is a major factor in coach control, but the size of the steering wheel should not go overlooked. A small steering wheel is fine as long as everything is working properly, but extra leverage can help during the case of a failed tire, engine stall, or power steering failure. To see coach manufacturers transitioning to smaller diameter steering wheels causes some concern

A new take on braking
For years the practice for drivers has been to not apply the brakes during a tire failure. However in tests where NTSB and Greyhound dynamically failed 14 tires, braking did not appear to adversely affect handling. In fact, in a couple of cases, applying the brakes actually helped control the motorcoach. Information recorded from the instrumented load cell steering wheel substantiated this conclusion, which was consistent with what I felt at the wheel as the test driver.

On a couple of hard braking attempts the outboard camera showed the left wheel locking and the flat tire rotating around the wheel rim, while the right front tire benefited from full braking. This provided more usable brake force to the right side, which actually assisted in bringing the vehicle back to the right and under control.

Where a tire has not yet gone flat, such as in some delaminations, the force applied to both front wheels is still equal provided the braking system is reasonably balanced and brake forces are normal. Prior to these tests technicians at the test preparation facility in Louisville, KY took measurements of the brake pushrods and found them all in good adjustment. Greyhound recorded these measurements in its maintenance records.

Other variables such as independent front suspension may show different results of braking during a tire failure than what NTSB discovered in its tests. Nonetheless, in testing this 45-foot MCIDL3, we found that light, moderate and heavy braking did not negatively impact coach handling — and even assisted handling in two of the tests.

The driver is always a factor
A tire failure always demands immediate response, making the physical strength of the driver a variable impossible to eliminate. It must be included in the evaluation of front tire failures. It is a definite plus when a capable and alert driver with two hands on the steering wheel can keep it between the white lines.

Properly size rated tires = prevention
Obviously it is best a front tire never fail in the first place. But it can happen for any number of reasons and it is important to know the causes beforehand.

The primary preventive factor is a top quality, properly sized rated tire. This cannot be emphasized enough. Most 45-foot coaches have a front axle rating of about 4,000 to 6,000 pounds heavier than a standard 3-axle truck tractor. A common axle rating for a 45-foot motorcoach is 16,500 lbs, with a few older ones at 14,400 lbs and some new ones over 18,000 lbs. Most standard three-axle truck tractors have front axle ratings between 12,000 and 12,500 lbs. With the exception of some concrete mixers and other special equipment, the front axle on a 45-foot motorcoach is one of the heaviest rated front axles operating on the highways.

When the 45-foot coach increased in popularity in the 1990s, the primary tire in use was the 315/80R22.5 with a “J” load rating (8270 lbs @ 120 psi for a single tire) and an “L” (75 mph) speed rating — still a popular tire in the industry. However, a 16,500-lb front axle and a combined front tire load rating of 16,540 lbs inflated to 120 psi allows only an extra 40 load pounds before the tire is technically overloaded. All front axles do not carry the same weight rating, and all carriers are not running heavy, especially on daily commuter runs. But it is a critical point to consider in the purchase of tires.

According to one forensic tire expert, a tire subjected to a heavy-duty cycle may weaken over time and become more vulnerable to a failure. Essentially there is no insurance margin for an occasional overload on a fully loaded 45-foot motorcoach with a 16,500 lb axle and a tire with a J load rating. The tire may run most of its life on a heavier than normal duty cycle.

Over the past few years more carriers have gone to an L-rated tire (9,090 lbs. at 130 psi). This larger tire has an “L” load rating and “L” speed rating. This tire was not available in the early years of 45-foot motorcoaches. One large U.S. carrier that has kept tire incident records has reported a dramatic decrease in front tire problems since using an L-load rated tire.

While an L -load rated tire is more expensive, it is still prudent for fleet managers to purchase tires with axle and tire ratings sufficient to do support the actual weight loads. It is especially important to have a heavy tire on the steer axle. The use of an L-load rated tire on the steer axle only is usually sufficient for safety concerns.

Inflation pressure is important
The standard “J” rated tire requires 120 psi for the maximum load limit of 8,270 lbs, or a total tire load carrying capacity of 16,540 pounds for a single axle. If that pressure decreases even by 5 psi, it reduces the single axle load limit to 15,840 psi, or 660 lbs less than what is required for a 16,500 front axle. Correct inflation is critical, especially to a fully loaded motorcoach.

Tire pressure monitoring systems (TPMS) are becoming more popular. The NTSB recently recommended their use as the result of the Sherman, TX accident, which killed 17 passengers. Currently not all coaches have this system. Even if they did, it is no substitute for a manual air pressure check using a quality gauge — especially on the front tires.

Unfortunately in one accident I investigated while at the NTSB, the bus had a TPMS, but we could not determine if a fault code was present or just not recognized by the driver. In either case, the tire still delaminated resulting in a loss of control and an overturned bus with numerous injuries.

Because a front tire 40 or 50 psi low is not easily discernable to a driver during a visual inspection, the best safety practice is for the driver always to carry a quality tire gauge. It takes less than two minutes to check both front tires — a small inconvenience considering all it may prevent. Additionally, the driver needs to conduct a visual check for low tread, uneven wear or other tire damage — something a TPMS cannot do.

To prevent the failure in the first place the driver can take a few initial precautions to lessen the chance of a front tire failure. The driver can ensure the heaviest baggage is loaded in the rear baggage bay to take unnecessary weight off the front tires, especially if the coach is fully loaded. There is more for everyone in the bus and tire industries to learn on this topic, but I trust someone is alive today, or that lives will be saved in the future, because of the contributions from those who worked so tirelessly on these investigations and tests.

The opinions and analysis of issues addressed in this article are solely those of Larry Yohe and do not necessarily represent the shared views or official endorsement of the NTSB.

Larry Yohe served as an NTSB investigator for nearly 25 years with the majority of his time spent on truck and bus issues. Presently he is a motorcoach consultant and drives motorcoaches professionally. Contact Yohe at zephyr5@flash.net.

Chassijet focuses solely on the undercarriage of the vehicle.

A clean coach is just good business. But the burden of bus washing often falls to maintenance garage managers not so focused on the wash bay. Bus washing merits as much consideration any other maintenance detail.

Going clean is the easiest and most cost effective way to attract and retain the best customers. A washed vehicle encourages drivers to drive safely and maintain the vehicle. Technicians are prone to take more time under a clean vehicle to perform the necessary preventative maintenance. Regular washing with an effective system extends the life of the bus and helps hold its value.

Where a bus wash system represents a significant capital investment from initial planning to final installation, most companies rely on only one wash setup in one wash bay to clean all the vehicles in a mixed fleet from standard size bus and coaches to paratransit shuttles. The reasons for choosing the one best system over another run a gamut of reasons — space in the facility site, fleet size, allotted time and labor, water usage, waste water reclamation and environmental regulations. The key is to choose correctly.

Innovative bus wash companies and manufacturers are working to make the chore of bus washing easier to afford, easier to manage, faster and less labor intensive, less abrasive to the rolling stock and kinder to the environment.

The efficiencies in new bus washing systems continue to lower the cost per bus in terms of chemicals and water required. Above ground reclamation systems have improved the issues with cleanliness in the wash bay with the system operating similar to a filtered pool.

Ross & White says its highly adaptable hybrid bus wash systems get the job done and help control costs.

The challenge of mixed fleets
Ross & White Company, Cary, IL, says the newest bus wash challenge for transit agencies is the recent proliferation of buses of every model and size coming through one system.

“The wash system once accommodated only one standard box-shaped transit bus, now it must have the flexibility to handle small body-on-chassis paratransit buses, articulated vehicles and a variety of shuttles,” says company principle Jeff Ross. “Though a brush system is still the best way to go, these mixed fleets require the incorporation of high pressure spray technology.”

The company says it meets this challenge with highly adaptable hybrid bus wash systems that combine brush and touchless spray technology. Technicians can easily modify the brushes and sprays for every type of vehicle in the fleet.

“A brush system by itself may be the most economical,” says Ross. “But the combination of brush and spray cleans evenly and gets into areas where brushes alone cannot reach.”

The ChassiJet trolley fits into any available maintenance bay.

Out of sight still in mind
Cleaning Equipment Unlimited, Northridge, CA, is the official U.S. distributor for Chassijet, an automatic, programmable chassis cleaning system manufactured in the U.K. The company says a clean bus creates a strong image, but the underside of the vehicle requires as much attention in terms of safety and longevity. Chassijet president Rick Ray says from a maintenance perspective the dirt and grime that collects out of sight is far more damaging.

The Chassijet provides automatic press-button cleaning of the underside of all over-the-road vehicles. The programmable cleaning trolley travels on its own set of rails under the stationary vehicle as the high-pressure 2000 psi oscillating, sweeping spray jets do the cleaning.

The system memory accommodates up to 40 programs entered at the time of manufacture or during the installation process. A technician can make program additions and alterations at any time using the operator keypad or manually select the required function.

Chassijet says the various programs adjust and coordinate wash speed, water temperature, detergent injection and foam application for any combination of vehicle lengths. Dwell periods allow the system to concentrate on heavily soiled areas.

The ChassiJet trolley rails bolt directly to the floor suspended over an existing inspection pit. Or the system can fit to a specially constructed ramp. Available options include a hot water module, detergent injection, pre-wash foam application, pressure reduction, frost protection, manual hand lance and water reclamation

Outsource the wash system
Where bus wash companies typically manufacturer and market the equipment. DyChem International, Salt Lake City, UT, installs and maintains its proprietary wash system for the opportunity to supply the cleaning products. DyChem says the business model is essentially an outsourcing process akin to a long-term lease arrangement. The company says the investment by the fleet owner is minimal and maintenance-free. The basic requirements are an available wash bay on the premises with adequate water, power and drainage.

The process consists of a fast-acting two-phase application system using safe and harmless biodegradable chemicals that DyChem says thoroughly flushes away under high pressure rinsing. The first step is a low pH product applied to the entire vehicle. An alkaline product then neutralizes the low pH creating the chemical shock that releases the statically held road film and dirt from the surfaces.

The simple drive-through spray system washes a vehicle in approximately 60 seconds.

Jonathon Howe, DyChem vice president, sales and marketing, says the typical DyChem contract covers between 300 and 400 bus washes per month for a fleet of 75 to 100 vehicles.

“We use this as a benchmark for the size fleet necessary to invest in a partnership with DyChem for the purchase the cleaning chemicals from DyChem,” says Howe. “However, we can offer a longer contract for smaller fleets.”

Through its nationwide network of representatives, DyChem provides all maintenance and repairs due to normal use for the duration of the partnership, limiting customer expense to actual product usage.

The extra care given to the exterior surfaces of buses and motorcoaches has become a greater concern in the advent of sophisticated bus-wrap advertising, and transportation companies wanting to sport a more upscale appearance. BR

PHOTO 1: The assembly connects the shop air hoses to the wet air tank and the parking tank of the bus.

Safety and Maintenance
By Christopher W. Ferrone

I have written about winter preparation in the past [BUSRide, March 2009, Safety and Maintenance, Preparing for extreme cold operations]. But this year has been an especially cold winter in Chicago, which only exacerbated what was just a minor problem for our buses. Normally during the average winter we have about one airline a week freeze up on one of our buses. But as cold as it is this year I recently came across a solution specifically related to preventing the parking brake from freezing — a device anyone can make in the garage. Using this kit this winter we have completely eliminated air system and parking brake freeze-ups.

Basically, we inject alcohol into the air system to prevent any water or moisture trapped in the air tanks from freezing. But there is a problem with this. If alcohol injected into the system were to enter the air dryer, the dryer desiccant would react to the alcohol and become contaminated.

To prevent this from happening, I have put together a fitting assembly that connects to a common shop air hose and coupler that fills the shop air hose with alcohol. The assembly connects the shop air hoses to the wet air tank and the parking tank of the bus (see photo 1).

The first step in using this kit is to fill the shop air hose with six ounces of air brake anti-freeze (alcohol) using a fill funnel (see photo 2). The funnel can be a plastic, paint cup normally used for a gravity feed paint sprayer and a common male quick connect coupler.

Disconnect the shop air hose from the shop compressor to prevent the funnel from becoming pressurized. Then attach the funnel to the shop air hose and add the alcohol.

Next, wearing safety glasses during this process, completely drain both the wet air tank and the parking air tank. Connect the shop air hose to the wet air tank connector and fill the air tank with the air / alcohol mixture coming from the shop air hose. This step will inject alcohol into the wet air tank.

PHOTO 2: Fill the shop air hose with six ounces of air brake anti-freeze (alcohol) using a fill funnel.

Add another six ounces of alcohol to the shop air hose using the funnel. Connect the shop air hose to the parking air tank connector. This will fill the tank with the air / alcohol mixture coming from the shop air hose.

Any technician can make this inexpensive kit from common air hose connectors and valves available at any parts store, as is the alcohol and funnel.

It is important to include an air shut-off valve between the quick connect coupler and the air tank. This will prevent any air leakage from the quick connect coupler if it fails to seal as a result of ice formation or debris inside this coupler.

As an additional step to prevent any unwanted accumulation of salt and debris, coat the outside surface of the quick connectors assembled and installed on the bus with a thin layer of grease.

As a final step, pull back the movable section of the female quick connector and apply never-seize compound with a brush. This will ensure the movable section of the connector will always move, allowing the connector to couple to the shop air hose male connector.

The total cost per bus comprised of two connector assemblies (wet and parking tank) is less than twenty dollars — a small price to pay for an almost guaranteed solution for the prevention of air system freeze-up.

Christopher W. Ferrone is president of Americoach Systems Inc., Glenview, IL, an engineering firm specializing in transportation, technology, analysis and safety.

Last year it became clear that the government would issue a seat belt mandate for new motorcoaches. This would not come as a complete surprise to the industry given recent high profile fatal accidents involving ejections, and especially the motorcoach-specific crash testing NHTSA has conducted on the effectiveness of passenger restraints.

Still, operators have been waiting with anticipation to see precisely what the government would mandate in this imminent regulation. Of particular interest to many coach operators is not what will be required on new coaches, but rather what will be required — or not — with regard to retrofitting existing coaches.

The widespread concern among operators is once the feds announce a standard that requires restraints on all newly manufactured coaches, customer demand will necessitate retrofitting seatbelts on existing coaches.

Significant fanfare

While I think there will be significant fanfare and attention to go along with such an announcement, memories are short for many and I am just not as sure as some operators that their customers will demand seat belts on all of their chartered coaches. Student groups might be the exception. The lack of seat belts has not kept customers from using coaches.

Experience has shown that a great number of passengers seldom use the seat belts on vehicles with restraint systems such as minibuses.

Nonetheless, I do believe a significant number of operators will move toward retrofitting at least a portion of their existing fleet with seatbelts largely to accommodate perceived customer demand; to gain a competitive edge over the competition; and to protect themselves from the risk of litigation. Though questions remain on whether the proposed mandate will include standards for retrofitting, operators can be certain their decision to retrofit or not must be an informed one.

Demand for retrofitting

Coach and seat manufacturers have anticipated the demand for retrofitting and have come up with several solutions that vary in types of restraint and cost. While operators may have several available options other than the OEM-sanctioned systems, they must also approach any aftermarket product with extreme caution and forethought. Saving money by choosing a non-sanctioned solution only increases the risk to carriers in the event of injuries or claims that involve the restraint system.

Essentially, the decision to retrofit or not to retrofit comes down to two basic questions: What type of restraint system to install and whose product to use. Retrofitting coaches with three-point lap and shoulder belt systems to meet the new coach standard will be very costly. It will require structural changes to most coach floors, as well as the wholesale replacement of all seats. The coach manufacturer will have to make these changes, which, needless to say, are simply cost prohibitive for most coach operators without funding assistance.

While the two-point systems are certainly more affordable, they offer less protection than three-belt systems. In fact, crash and sled testing data indicate that head and neck injuries sustained during frontal crashes are more severe for two-point system users than for those not wearing any restraints whatsoever.

Cost flexibility

Additionally, testing has not ascertained the improved safety from a two-point system in the event of a rollover, leaving uncertain the degree of protection afforded during the historically most catastrophic types of events. Unfortunately, these two-point restraint systems will be the only systems with enough cost flexibility to allow many operators to retrofit their coaches.

Regardless of the type of restraint system they choose, operators need to conduct due diligence on the supplier. Choose suppliers with experience in the motorcoach industry; whose products are certified and meet applicable and industry standards; and who have published vehicle-specific applicability and installation guides to manage as much as possible the risk to the carrier. The industry will undoubtedly see many more aftermarket restraint products come on the market.

Many of these products will lack the backing of any such credibility. My advice is to simply steer clear of any quick fix and most likely much cheaper solution.

The more important considerations in a restraint system is its applicability with the specific coach and seats being retrofitted; whether the belts and anchorages meet applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS); and if it meets other voluntary standards such as European or Australian crash standards.

Some products may even meet other federal vehicle safety standards even though they are not required for a motorcoach.

Matthew A. Daecher is president and CEO of Daecher Consulting Group, Inc., Camp Hills, CA. [ www.safetyteam.com ]

Prairie Trailways foreman, Sergio Esquivel Sr. inspects an air filter indicator for cracks.

Even after 30-plus years in this business, I still discover on occasion something in our garage that scares me into action.

For about a week I had been hearing a high-pitched whistling noise coming from an S-60 engine. I inspected it and drove it personally, but was still unable to locate the source. With a little more probing, I eventually diagnosed the disturbing noise as coming from the air intake system on the engine.

The old-school way to locate an intake leak is to spray the intake ducting with starting fluid, which increases engine RPMs. I tried this test procedure, but still could not pinpoint the whistling.

Finally after a few hours of looking over the engine and ducting, I located a cracked air filter restriction indicator. Mounted on the intake duct, the crack was very small and hard to see. I was able to see the crack better once I took it off the duct, and immediately understood the problem with the failed filter indicator in photo 1. Air was entering through the crack in the indicator and making the whistling noise.

My point here is how one $10 filter indicator could have wiped out the $20,000 engine; proof that attention to the air cleaner is one of the most important details in engine maintenance. This is how the engine breathes.

The filter indicator is mounted downstream (photo 2) of the air cleaner. If it cracks and allows air to enter the intake ducting, it is unfiltered air that is entering the engine. Similar to a human breathing air that is not clean and feeling it in the lungs.As miles and engine hours elapse and mount up, a large quantity of dirty unfiltered air will have entered the engine and caused damage to the all the air-side components.

At least three conditions can negatively affect the filter indicator: age, heat and solvents. Any one of these — together or separately — can cause this type of crack failure in the body of the indicator.

PHOTO 1: A cracked air filter indicator.

PHOTO 2: Air filter indicator installed downstream of air cleaner.

PHOTO 3: A simple brass plug eliminates and replaces the filter indicator.

At Chicago Sightseeing we change out all the air cleaners in the fleet regularly on a three-month cycle, which equates to about 10,000 miles. This service schedule has worked well for our engines since our fleet has a high percentage of idle time per day. By changing these filters according to a strict timetable — rather than by going on the current condition of the filter — we do not need the indicator in our garage.

As a result, we also have systematically removed all filter indicators fleet wide and replaced them with brass plugs, eliminating the need for an indicator all together. These brass plugs are easy to find and easy to install (photo 3). This change over procedure has eliminated an unnecessary risk that had no benefit to our fleet.

For any coach operator experiencing the same sort of failure, my advice is to immediately remove the damaged indicator and replace it with a new one if the choice is to keep using it, or install the plugs and eliminate the indicator.

An additional step is to determine if dirty air entering the engine has done any damage. Remove the turbocharger intake duct and inspect the turbocharger compressor vanes. If the vanes appear to be pitted or their edges eroded, too much dirty air has entered the engine and damaged the turbocharger, and most likely the air-side components of the engine as well.

This problem becomes all the more deceptive because it seems so simple to the casual observer. However, if ignored, it could mean replacing a new engine instead of a mere indicator. In maintenance it is always the simple mundane problem in the first place that often leads to the larger and more difficult problems.

Christopher W. Ferrone is  president of Americoach Systems, Inc., Glenview, IL, an  engineering firm specializing in transportation technology, analysis and engineering safety.

Now operators have only to focus their attention on how to deal with Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) in a way that creates the least amount of disruption to safety and to business.

In general the DPF collects soot and ash produced by the engine and converts it to carbon dioxide gas. In this process of regeneration, or re-greening, the DPF heats to a temperature in the conversion and expels the gas out the tailpipe. At some point technicians may need to remove the filter and clean out the residual soot and ash using a special machine to regenerate — or regen for short — the DPF. The cost for this process is approximately $400 plus labor based on the operational profile, the climate and overall conditions during operation.

Here is the rub. A motorcoach operating at low average speed, such as a sightseeing bus or trolley may never achieve the mph required for automatic regeneration. As I have discovered in my fleet of sightseeing buses driving around Chicago, this becomes an inconvenience to the operator when the DPF does not regenerate automatically on public streets. But the DPF still needs periodic regeneration. This is why it is vital that operators of any slower moving vehicle understand the regen process, what triggers the DPF and how to regenerate it when normal operation does not trigger the process automatically.

This is not just a matter of a clogged DPF that pollutes more. Failure to regenerate automatically or manually can become a serious problem if the dash light illuminates and the condition goes uncorrected. The emission control monitor (ECM) will kick in and derate the engine power to where it travels only at very low speeds regardless of throttle position. This should force the operator to regenerate the DPF and not ignore the problem. Left alone this condition eventually renders the bus undriveable, stopped or slowed in a travel lane creating the potential for an accident.

Automatic and stationary regeneration
Automatic regen occurs when the vehicle is under a heavy-duty load cycle or above a predetermined road speed and rpm. In some cases the road speed threshold may only be 20 mph, but moving any slower the engine will not automatically regenerate.

During automatic regen the system takes over and conducts the process, which the operator does not detect with the possible exception of a slightly elevated noise from the turbocharger. This is due to the VGT feature on some engines that elevates exhaust temperatures to complete the process.

In buses and motorcoaches that normally travel at road speeds greater than the threshold of say 20 mph, the regen process occurs automatically without assistance from the operator. However for any vehicles that run at average speeds below this threshold, operators will need to conduct the regen process manually.

In the case of stationary regen, using the Chicago Sightseeing Co. fleet as an example, the average road speed for sightseeing buses is seven mph, according to the ECM. This is too low of a speed to ever trigger the automatic regen process, and calls for stationary or forced regeneration for this group of vehicles.

The stationary process is simple. OEMs have provided a dash switch that activates the regen process while the vehicle is stationary with the transmission in neutral and the parking brake applied. I have found in some cases the OEM has not activated the stationary regen capability within the ECM. In this case the technician will need to attach a laptop computer with the appropriate software and manually to change the stationary option from disable to enable. A simple process, but one that requires the correct equipment and a little know-how.

During the regen process the exhaust temperature can reach as high as 1,500 degrees F — well above the auto-ignition temperature of almost all fluids and other combustibles on the vehicle. Before initiating the process, park the vehicle away from people in a location where the heat will not damage the pavement and the surrounding area is not a fire hazard. Some OEMs have included an additional dash light that will illuminate if the exhaust temperature reaches a critical level. This indicates nothing more than the exhaust temperature and will not derate the engine power or stop the vehicle.

The most practical way to reduce the exhaust temperature is to begin driving. This is as simple as going around the block a few times at a slow rate of speed. This will wash cooler air over the DPF, creating a convective cooling effect and reducing the DPF temperature. In some cases the diagnostic software can initiate and perform the stationary regen process.

A forced duty cycle is a second stationary regen method. This method simply puts the vehicle of slow average speed into a duty cycle that exceeds the threshold required to trigger the regen process.

At Chicago Sightseeing we simply drive the vehicles out on the expressway periodically to force the DPF to regen. Typically, once the DPF light comes on, a 20-minute drive at 55 mph will force the regen process to convert the soot and ash and turn off the dash light. As with the stationary method, in some cases the vehicle will need to travel at a slow rate of speed until the DPF cools down and turns off the dash light.

Operators need to further understand there are different stages of DPF blockage. Some manufacturers cite as many as four stages of blockage. Once the system reaches stage four no amount of attempts, regardless of method, will clean the DPF and the dash light will remain illuminated. The only way to put the vehicle back into service at this point is to remove the DPF and have it cleaned in the appropriate cleaning machine.

For either regen action, the dash lights indicate the DPF needs cleaning. There are typically two dash lights for the DPF system, but the check engine light doubles as an indicator that the DPF system needs a regen.

Even if the DPF system senses the need but the condition is not severe, the DPF dash light will still illuminate.

When it hits severe levels and the system begins to derate the engine, the check engine light will illuminate simultaneously with the DPF light, indicating the DPF needs to regen immediately.

The extra care given to the exterior surfaces of transit buses has become a greater concern with the advent of sophisticated bus-wrap advertising, and with transit buses sporting a more polished upscale appearance. A bus wash system represents a significant capital investment from initial planning to installation.

The reasons for choosing one system over another run the gamut of variables — space and site considerations, the size of the fleet, allotted time and labor, water usage, water reclamation and a host of environmental regulations. The key is making the correct choice of the most appropriate and cost-effective wash system.

Hybrid brush and spray handle every situation
Ross & White Company
Cary, IL

Ross & White Company, Cary, IL, has been designing, manufacturing and installing transit vehicle wash equipment for 75 years. The company says today’s challenge is to balance costs with the capability to wash an entire fleet comprised of different types of vehicles. Ross & White works with many companies that run standard transit buses, articulated buses, the higher commuter motorcoaches and body-on-chassis paratransit vehicles, and require one system in one wash bay to accommodate each type. The company says it meets that challenge with its highly adaptable hybrid bus wash systems that combine brush and touchless technology.

Ross & White president Jeff Ross says the combination of brush and spray cleans evenly and gets into wheels, bike racks and undercarriages — those hard to get areas where brushes alone do not normally reach.

The brushes and sprays are easily modified to fit the wash requirements for each bus that comes through the system.

The Compact drive-through is ideal in small spaces
Westmatic
Troy, MI

Westmatic, Troy, MI, says its Compact bus washing equipment is a particularly effective drive-through system for existing facilities with limited space. Available in two-, four- and six-brush configurations for areas up to 20 by 30 feet, the Compact features lights that signal the driver to stop and move ahead at each step of the wash and rinse cycle. The system utilizes an automatic speed control system that prevents driver error during the wash process.

The six-brush Compact is the most popular model. Westmatic president Robert Sundell says the proprietary split brush configurations are a proven solution to damage that often occurs from buses with bike racks coming through the bus wash. The eco-friendly Westmatic equipment also features a mirror protection program that washes around the mirrors to prevent damage. The Compact is also available with a touchless high-pressure arch.

The ACC-Eco-Powerbrush is fast, efficient and economical
ACC International
Niagara Falls, NY

The ACC-Eco-Powerbrush from ACC International is well-balanced rotating brush apparatus a technician walks and pushes around the stationary bus or motorcoach, washing the bus in a pulling motion.

ACC International says the typical wash with this eco-friendly system takes less than 10 minutes using only three to five gallons of water per minute. James Stieva says fewer chemicals are needed because the spinning brush does most of the work to remove dirt and grime.

The ACC Eco-Power Brush installs in most existing wash areas, both indoor and outdoor, and does not require floor-mounted tracks or hardware.