Tag: breakdowns

Salt Deposits Cause MRT Breakdowns

Salt, water and electricity do not mix. Commuters in Singapore found out the hard way on July 7, when an accumulation of salty deposits on an electrical component on the East-West Line triggered the biggest rail breakdown here.

Releasing their findings three weeks after the incident yesterday, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) and rail operator SMRT said laboratory tests found that the deposits were caused by a persistent leak near the Tanjong Pagar station tunnel, towards Raffles Place.

The deposits were 15 times saltier than seawater.

Water from the leak itself was found to be one-sixth the saltiness of seawater – an indication that the deposits had taken some time to precipitate.

The deposits allowed electricity from the MRT’s power-supplying third rail to stray across its insulator into the ground. This caused several electrical trips along the East-West Line as well as the connected North-South Line.

Tripping cuts off electricity supply to prevent a stray current from electrocuting train occupants.

The findings were arrived at with the help of external experts from Parsons Brinckerhoff and Meidensha, whose services were paid for by LTA. They coincide with a hypothesis by George Yu, a chartered engineer specialising in industrial forensics, failure analysis and accident investigation.

Dr Yu, who has done extensive work on the MRT, told The Straits Times just days after the July 7 breakdown that deposits on insulators were the prime suspect.

He said contaminants would settle on the third-rail insulators over time. These include water, and graphite from the trains’ current collector shoes, which make contact with the rail. Graphite is a conductor of electricity.

To prevent a repeat of the incident, Dr Yu said SMRT should “prevent insulators from contacting water or liquid”. He also suggested that insulators be regularly cleaned to prevent deposit build-up and that old insulators with heavy deposits in areas exposed to tunnel water leakage be immediately replaced.

SMRT said that this was done right after the incident. The operator and LTA said yesterday that some 30,000 insulators on both lines will be replaced by the first quarter of 2017 – along with the planned third-rail-replacement programme.

SMRT also said it would improve maintenance of the insulators. Chief executive Desmond Kuek said: “We’ve reviewed all our existing work instructions and we’re satisfied that they’ve all been complied with. But…we will be taking firm steps to review and improve all those work instructions.”

SMRT will also “desensitise” the circuit breakers that trip the system, by raising the stray voltage limit from 136 volts to 200 volts by end of this week. LTA said this was in accordance with international standards and was completely safe.

In the longer term, it will implement voltage limiting devices which are being tested in Downtown Line 1. These will isolate power trips.

LTA added that it was also studying the feasibility of separating the North-South and East-West lines, so that a power incident does not spread across both lines.

It said this would be considered carefully, so as to ensure that doing so would not cause other weaknesses.

LTA chief executive Chew Mun Leong added that “we will leave no stone unturned” to improve the reliability of the system.

Source: http://transport.asiaone.com

July 30, 2015
Ex-SMRT Engineer Speaks Out About The Frequent Breakdowns

Singapore’s Mass Raid Transit (MRT) network experienced its largest disruption on 7 July 2015, with the total breakdown of the East West and North South Lines, lasting over three and a half hours. An estimated 250,000 commuters were inconvenienced by the breakdown, which happened during the evening rush hour.

Since its inception in 1987, the Singapore MRT system, a project spearheaded by former President Ong Teng Cheong, has served commuters well, providing an affordable and efficient mode of transportation for everyone.

However, in recent years, breakdowns from the MRT system have been growing in frequency, even for the lines that have only been in service for a few years. Many of the breakdowns would not have been reported if not for social media.

A press statement released by the SMRT on the recent breakdown said that the company would be seeking assistance from retired engineers to address the situation.

“SMRT is working with external experts to review the design robustness of the power network, and to find ways to further segment it in order to avoid a similar network-wide power failure. We have also brought in a number of retired SMRT staff with experience in network power issues to assist in the investigations. At the same time, we have advanced the procurement of additional condition monitoring systems that were being developed jointly with R&D agencies.”

So is there need to bring in retired engineers who may not be familiar with newer technology? And why are existing engineers unable to fix the system, given that over time, engineers employed by the company would have been more experienced and better trained in the train network?

And why are breakdowns more frequent these days despite promises by the government to fix them since the last General Election in 2011?

Are they not putting in enough effort in doing so or are they unable to do so without addressing a far more serious problem about the transport company.

A resignation letter dated 10 September 2004, written by a former assistant engineer (AE) more than ten years ago may shed some light on the deep rooted problem of the transport company.

This was what the letter said:

“I would like to thank you all for giving me the opportunity to work here at SMRT for so many years, I have truly enjoyed my time here, and I will always be grateful for the opportunity to stay on. I have always tried to do my best, even in the last year or so, and I wish that I could stay on until my retirement day. I had never wanted to leave the company, but unfortunately, in life, sometimes one is forced to make difficult decisions that have less to do with what one actually desires, and more to do with what one feels is necessary. In view of everything that I have heard, everything I have seen and everything that I have personally experienced in EPL (Escalators, Platform screen doors & Lifts) in the last three years or so, I cannot, with good conscience, continue to work here any more. I greatly fear if the current working practices continue, a serious incident may happen in future, and I have no desire to be a party for the occurrence.

I have compiled here a few examples of the problems plaguing EPL, problems that I believe have led to two other long-serving Assistant Engineers, XXX and XXX to resign before me. I have tried hard to change the system from within by raising issues to the EPL management that I think are important and should be looked into urgently, and I have tried to offer concrete suggestions on how to deal with some of these problems, but it appears to me that many of these problems were not, and are not, being dealt with seriously, if at all.

The apparent lack of interest in resolving problems by the EPL management have led to a serious fall in staff morale, with the inevitable drop in staff discipline as well, for verbal and even written letters of warning have been issued widely to many of the men. There also appears to be no consistency to the enforcement of disciplinary standard, for warning letters have been issued to some men for certain incidents, while no disciplinary action has been taken against some other staff for incidents of a similar nature. Orders are often issued verbally, with no follow-up memo, so that it becomes difficult for a staff member to check and clarify on any order he does not quite understand.

Often, when something goes wrong, the men have no way to defend themselves as there is no documentary evidence to back up their assertions.

We have even been ordered to alter reports to suit the EPL management’s view.

As the conditions that the EPL rank and file staff have to work under, it is no surprise that there have been so many resignations as the conditions I have outlined in the preceding few lines make it difficult for us to continue working here.

I have compiled this dossier here in the hope that the relevant authority will read it and hopefully come to understand the problems that have led to three long-servicing AEs to resign in the very short space of six months.

I hope the relevant authority will take this report seriously and look into the issues I have raised, for there are several; other EPL staff who have privately confided that they are seriously considering resigning should matters come to a head.

Please note that what I have expressed here are based upon my own experiences and observations, and that the opinions raised are entirely my own opinions, and that nothing I have written here is intended to cause any reflection on the organization or on any person.”

In the dossier which this former SMRT engineer has compiled, it can be seen from email conversations how AEs were being asked, for example, to “downscale” the status of incidents from “incident” to “routine maintenance” in records; and also the sharp increase of escalator breakdowns in the year 2003 in comparison to 2001 and 2002.

Sharp jump in number of incidents

The AE shared how his colleagues had thoughts of leaving the company given the lack of regards to maintenance by the company and how double standards were practiced on matters such as disciplining staff.

After the investigations into the 2011 December breakdowns, members of the public were appalled when they found out that SMRT had been skiving on maintenance despite a heavier load on the system due to an increased population.

In the next report, TOC will cover one of the engineering issues faced by SMRT raised by this former engineer.

Source: www.theonlinecitizen.com

July 14, 2015
MRT Breakdowns: If PAP Does Not Fire Paper General-CEO, Commuters Should Fire PAP

The latest SMRT breakdown which affected more than 250,000 won’t be the last. As the population increases towards PAP’s 6.9 million target, rest assured the mother of all SMRT breakdowns will be making her appearance. The government should not continue to deny what’s inevitable.

In URA’s Revised Concept Plan 1991, the government had wanted “to develop a viable land transport network that could meet the demand of a population of 4 million by the year 2030”. Obviously, even if it’s not obvious to our scholars, there are going to be issues. And plenty of them – more than 60 breakdowns and delays after GE 2011.

What we currently have is a broken system and no amount of papering over the cracks from our perpetually-concerned politicians will help. Every assurance coming from the PAP will be another half-truth.

Commuters are not blaming SMRT staff or engineers but PAP for a system which parachutes scholars with ZERO relevant experience into top positions in the civil service and GLCs.

A permanent solution is to get rid of such a non-transparent and unaccountable system, failing which the alternative is to say good riddance to PAP.

In view of the abject failure of ex Ferrari driving CEO Saw Paik Hwa, any responsible CEO would have employed personnel with decades of experience but not Kuek.

Abject failure ex CEO Saw

Instead, CEO Kuek roped in 4 of his army buddies with ZERO relevant experience “to steer the beleaguered transport operator back on track”. How’s that for an insult? Through his action, Kuek clearly had no intention to improve SMRT.

On the latest incident, Kuek reminded the public that “the journey to bringing about a much higher order of reliability and assurance is a difficult one, but we are committed to doing so .”

Hmm .. still dare to TKSS after inconveniencing more than $250,000 commuters? If his task was so simple, he would be earning a 5-figure annual salary, not $2,300,000. Without PAP support, Kuek would have been history. In fact, he wouldn’t be able to insult commuters as SMRT CEO.

When we look at other parts of PAP’s system, we can see that it is rotten to the core and in urgent need of a revamp.

As the regulator of SMRT, LTA is headed by ex navy chief Chew Men Leong. Not only did SMRT CEO have zero experience, neither did the head of its regulator!

Zero experience + zero experience = trial and error/need more breakdowns to learn lessons/commuters suffer.

After Chew left the navy in 2011, he was parachuted into PUB and became CEO with zero relevant experience. When flash floods hit Singapore in December 2011, Chew was praising PUB for its efforts to alleviate floods and claimed that we are the “victims of our own success”. Chew could not empathise with businesses which had lost millions. To Chew, PUB was a runaway success and it was really not their problem.

Trial to use buildings for water storage by PUB?

Image credit: STOMP

What about ex LTA CEO, Chew Hock Yong, who needs to shoulder some of the blame for the recent breakdowns? Under PAP’s merry-go-round system, Hock Yong was promoted to Second Permanent Secretary, MND, to oversee the newly-formed Municipal Services Office. Does one need to have extensive experience at LTA in order to be promoted to MND Perm Sec?

In a statement, the Ministry of Transport extended its appreciation to Mr Chew for his significant contributions in his four years as LTA’s chief executive. It sounded like Chew Hock Yong did a perfect job as LTA CEO overseeing SMRT and one should not link any SMRT breakdown to him.

During Roy’s cross-examination on 1 July, PM Lee had agreed that the CEO should take responsibility for MRT trains breakdown. 31 years earlier, Lee Kuan Yew had also said that if things did not work, the chief would be held responsible and “firing the chief is very simple”. (quoted from TOC article)

Sadly, the reality is PAP is all talk but no action, one rule for ordinary Singaporeans and another for elites. Instances of unaccountability:

During the twice in 50 years Orchard Road ponding in 2010 and 2011, PUB CEO Khoo Teng Chye put the blame on everything except himself and refused to apologise. Khoo was not fired but went on to head theCentre For Liveable Cities, fully funded by taxpayers.

For serious lapses at CPIB involving $1.7 million in public funds, which tarnished its reputation, director Eric Tan was not fired but merely redeployed to another department in 2013. Instead of an internal promotion, Eric was replaced by Workforce Development Agency’s Wong Hong Kuan who had ZERO relevant experience. Before Eric became CPIB Director, he was with the ICA and had ZERO relevant experience. More about Eric Tan at Singapore Notes.

And surely nothing beats this – a commissioner of police becoming PUB CEO.

If there was succession planning, surely there must be employees within the organisation with more extensive experience to become CEO than appointing a scholar with ZERO experience. Truth be said, meritocracy is dead and promotion under the PAP is based on loyalty, nothing to do with merit.

There are too many instances of PAP not holding itself accountable for epic screw ups. PAP can’t simply issue statements of perpetual concern and let the matter be. Instead of transferring a deadweight to another government department, it’s about time to let SMRT CEO go. Being a scholar with decades of experience in the military and government, Kuek should be able to find meaningful employment anywhere.

By “firing the chief”, LKY must have meant letting him go before he wreaks more havoc on people’s lives, not transferred. With the mess that PAP has created, LKY is likely to be turning in his grave.

Conclusion

Public transport commuters must demand for Kuek to be held accountable, ie fired, or it will be too late after a disaster has struck. From the above examples, it is obvious PAP has acted irresponsibly by allowing government organisations to be helmed by parachuters with zero experience.

Promotions in the civil service and GLCs are based on loyalty to a political party and unrelated to meritocracy. PAP is self serving and does not serve citizens. Such a system is rotten to the core.

If PAP can’t even show that it’s serious on accountability for once by firing SMRT CEO, commuters should not hesitate to fire the PAP at the next election.

Source: https://likedatosocanmeh.wordpress.com

July 13, 2015
LTA Tells SMRT That Spate Of Breakdowns Are Unacceptable

The authorities are investigating the recent spate of train service disruptions on SMRT’s rail network and plan to review the operator’s resources and processes for maintaining the rail system.

Calling the situation “unacceptable”, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) said it has asked SMRT to investigate the disruptions — with two incidents today (March 3) bringing the count to five in nine days — and provide a full account.

“The LTA will be working with SMRT on the immediate remedial actions to turn around the situation,” a spokesperson said today. “We intend to review again SMRT’s management of resources and processes for the maintenance of the rail system.”

This evening’s disruption on the East-West Line began at 5.35pm, when track faults at Clementi and Lakeside stations caused trains to slow down from Queenstown to Boon Lay.

Commuters were advised to add 20 minutes to their travelling time between Bugis and Jurong East stations in both directions as bridging bus services were activated. SMRT later announced at 7.12pm that normal service had resumed.

In the morning, a signalling fault at 7.28am at HarbourFront station on the Circle Line stopped all trains between Haw Par Villa and HarbourFront. Passengers on four trains had to be driven manually to the nearest stations, while free buses and seven shuttle bus services were activated. Service resumed at 8.11am.

In a statement today, SMRT said it was looking into the cause of the Circle Line incident. It also gave an update on investigations into the three service disruptions last week — two on the North-South Line (NSL) and one on the Bukit Panjang LRT line.

Investigations showed that the NSL incident on Feb 23 was caused by a damaged power collective device on the train that affected the third rail, which supplies power to the train.

“A fleet-wide inspection of all trains that service the North-South, East-West Lines was completed to ensure all power collecting devices on the trains are in good condition. In addition, we have also inspected the third rail condition along the incident stretch of track to ensure that it is fit for use,” the operator added.

The Bukit Panjang LRT disruption on Feb 24 was caused by a dislodged power and signal collecting assembly on an LRT train, which hit a signal rail and caused a power trip. The damaged signal rail had to be repaired. No anomalies were found during a system-wide check on all other trains and tracks.

The third disruption occurred on the NSL on Feb 27, when a man climbed onto the track between Choa Chu Kang and Bukit Gombak stations. “We are reviewing the existing security measures at those sections with the relevant authorities to further reduce the areas of vulnerability within the network,” SMRT said.

Commenting on the incidents, SMRT Trains managing director Lee Ling Wee said: “While SMRT’s investigations into these four incidents indicate that the cause of each incident was different and technically unrelated, we are clear that any service lapse for whatever reason affects the quality and reliability of service to our commuters.”

He added that SMRT has noted the feedback over gaps in its service recovery efforts — in particular the bus bridging services — and will work with the SMRT buses team to better manage them.

Mr Desmond Kuek, SMRT Corporation president and group chief executive officer, added: “We apologise for the rail incidents over the past week…The SMRT team will stay focused on safety and reliability improvements as we work to renew Singapore’s ageing rail network to the benefit of our commuters.”

Source: www.todayonline.com

March 4, 2015