1 / 28

LCC Based Permanent Way Strategies

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

Jims
Download Presentation

LCC Based Permanent Way Strategies

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LCC Based Permanent Way Strategies Peter Veit peter.veit@TUGraz.at

  2. Content - methodology of evaluation - analysis of present situation - quality behaviour of track

  3. Methodology of Evaluation

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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.

  7. 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 !

  8. 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%

  9. cost factor maximal average minimal radii [m] Track Costs for Different Radii Cost differences up to 1:3 even on good subsoil!

  10. 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

  11. 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!

  12. Track Quality and its Behaviour

  13. 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

  14. Behaviour of Track Quality

  15. Behaviour of Track Quality

  16. Behaviour of Track Quality Florian Auer, TUGraz, now ÖBB

  17. Behaviour of Track Quality

  18. Behaviour of Track Quality

  19. Behaviour of Track Quality

  20. 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

  21. time quality effect of maintenance action deterioration total quality function threshold value E technical service life quality Behaviour of Track Quality

  22. time but quality Behaviour of Track Quality

  23. 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!

  24. time quality effect of maintenance action deterioration total quality function conform threshold function E quality Conform Threshold Function

  25. 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

  26. 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

  27. 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

  28. Thank You for Your attention!

More Related