lcc based permanent way strategies l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
LCC Based Permanent Way Strategies PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
LCC Based Permanent Way Strategies

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 28

LCC Based Permanent Way Strategies - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 309 Views
  • Uploaded on

LCC Based Permanent Way Strategies Peter Veit peter.veit@TUGraz.at Content - methodology of evaluation - analysis of present situation - quality behaviour of track Methodology of Evaluation Q = Q 0 . e -b.t Life Cycle Costs based Strategies

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'LCC Based Permanent Way Strategies' - Jims


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
lcc based permanent way strategies
LCC Based Permanent Way Strategies

Peter Veit

peter.veit@TUGraz.at

slide2

Content

- methodology of evaluation

- analysis of present situation

- quality behaviour of track

slide4

Q = Q 0. e

-b.t

Life Cycle Costs based Strategies

experience: a good track behaves well, a poor one deteriorates faster

This quality behaviour is proofed with the track recording car data from 1992 to 1999

AND

all data show, that it is not possible to surpass the initial quality!

deterioration depends on the present quality level

costs of operational

hindrances

= LCC

investment

+

maintenance

slide5

investment

characteristics of standard kilometre

service life

planed maintenance

small maintenance

Input Data – Working Cycles

based on good subsoil conditions

Calculating of all track work given in the cycle including their costs of operational hindrances  life cycle cost

slide6

Methodology of Evaluation

Comparing both cycles shows the benefits of rails with the profile 60E1 for this standard kilometre

Comparing track strategies results in

stable rankings,

though absolute life cycle cost are not stable.

slide7

Input Data

Input data were not available from data banks describing the present (quality) situation of permanent way

because

we need to predict what happens if…

(behaviour of track!)

research in track behaviour

the data do not exist,

but the knowledge (still) exists!

step 2

TIME?!

started in 1998

WORKING GROUP

implemented at ÖBB between 1996 and 2002

step 1

! basic strategies !

slide8

Cost Driver

Speed < 160 km/h

1. Initial track quality defines maintenance requirements

2. Subsoil quality: 1 to 8 times

3. Switch density: 1 unit equals 450 m track

4. Alignment (Radii, ….): 1 to 3

5. Cost of operational hindrances: up to 30%

6. Traffic density: ~ linear, if superstructure and

substructure matches the traffic requirements

7. Quality of motive power units: ± 10%

slide9

cost factor

maximal

average

minimal

radii [m]

Track Costs for Different Radii

Cost differences up to 1:3 even on good subsoil!

slide10

annual cost [%]

Cost Analysis

100%

67%

50%

47%

57%

33%

67%

17%

Permanent way strategies aim to extend service life of track

Reducing maintenance accepting a reduction of service life

is highly uneconomical

Operational costs caused by maintenance work

(or a lack of maintenance) are decisive

slide11

15.0%

10.0%

5.0%

Differences in total annual cost compared to present situation

0.0%

-5.0%

-10.0%

age: 35 years

-15.0%

Motive power unit E 1044-200 = + 0,0%

D

E

A

B

G

C

R > 600 m

R < 250 m

F

400 < R < 600 m

250 < R < 400 m

Radii

Economic Impacts of Different Motive Power Units

new locos!

Conventional track user charges do not include

any incentive to invest in rolling stock quality!

slide13

Q = Q 0. e

-b.t

Quality Behavior of Track

Austrian quality figure “MDZ” is based on calculated differences of accelerations resulting from track irregularities

slide16

Behaviour of Track Quality

Florian Auer, TUGraz, now ÖBB

slide20

excellent quality, slow deterioration

less quality, faster deterioration

Behaviour of Track Quality

Present status of track and its history allows to calculate deterioration factor b for specific sections and so to define section specific investment and maintenance strategies

slide21

time

quality effect of maintenance action

deterioration

total quality function

threshold value E

technical service life

quality

Behaviour of Track Quality

slide22

time

but

quality

Behaviour of Track Quality

slide23

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

0

days

-5

-10

Q = Qme-bt

-15

threshold value

Q = Q0e-ct

-20

-25

-30

MDZ-A

Behaviour of Track Quality

fighting the causes sustainable maintenance

Q0

Q = Q0e-bt

Qm

Qtv

fighting the symptoms short term results

Description of quality needs status data AND its behaviour over time!

slide24

time

quality effect of maintenance action

deterioration

total quality function

conform threshold function E

quality

Conform Threshold Function

slide25

Q = Q0e- b t

b

number of interventions

10

15

Behaviour of Track Quality

Analysis show a not linear behaviour of bi, becoming critically after a certain number of tamping cycles

(good subsoil conditions)

NEEDS VERIFICATION

slide26

b = f(basic conditions)

Behaviour of Track Quality

Q = Q0e-bt

MAIN BASIC CONDITIONS

track superstructure

- initial quality

- type of superstructure

- radii (speed)

- traffic density

- subsoil quality

- ?

- ?

turnout

- additional:

operational conditions

summary
Summary

Degradation of track depends on track quality itself (ΔQ ~ Q)

That is the reason for the main importance of initial quality

For describing track quality we need to know the actual quality figure PLUS its behaviour over time

Development of track quality over time should be presented as part of recording car data analysis