outsourcing of track maintenance l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Outsourcing of Track Maintenance PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Outsourcing of Track Maintenance

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 38

Outsourcing of Track Maintenance - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 82 Views
  • Uploaded on

Outsourcing of Track Maintenance. Peter Veit peter.veit@TUGraz.at. Outsourcing can be understood as. - outsourcing of defined maintenance work (type of work, time, section) or. These two possibilities are different at all!. outsourcing based on job specifications.

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 'Outsourcing of Track Maintenance' - shirlyn


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
outsourcing of track maintenance
OutsourcingofTrack Maintenance

Peter Veit

peter.veit@TUGraz.at

slide2

Outsourcing

can be understood as

- outsourcing of defined maintenance

work (type of work, time, section) or

These two possibilities are different at all!

outsourcing based on job specifications

- outsourcing of the entire maintenance

regime for a track section and a defined

period

outsourcing based on functional requirements

slide3

Outsourcing based on

job specifications

maintenance company

infrastructure owner

Infrastructure organisation as owner optimises maintenance strategies (based on actual track quality data) defining

- which maintenance job has to be done

- when it has to be done and

- where it has to be done

Maintenance company executes the defined maintenance work in the defined track possession

Infrastructure organisation controls the quality of maintenance work and reopens track

Maintenance company is responsible for quality of maintenance work

Infrastructure owner is responsible for long term optimisation of track behaviour (technically and economically)

slide4

Outsourcing based on

functional requirements

maintenance company

infrastructure owner

Infrastructure organisation as owner defines functional requirements for permanent way (availability, riding quality, safety) to be met by the maintenance company for a defined period of time

Maintenance company develops a maintenance regime to meet the functional requirements for the defined period of time

Maintenance company executes this maintenance regime

Infrastructure controls the functional requirements

Maintenance company is responsible to meet the functional requirements for a defined period

Infrastructure owner is responsible for the functional requirements being in line with long term optimisation of track behaviour (technically and economically)

slide5

Functional requirements for track maintenance must be in line with technical and economical behaviour of track in order to allow optimisation of track maintenance

Exact knowledge of track behaviour is a precondition to define functional requirements

Track behaviour can be understood in taking all service life into account only!

slide6

Content

- optimisation of track strategies

- methodology of economic evaluation

- cost driver

- quality behaviour of track

- consequences for outsourcing of maintenance

slide7

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

slide8

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

slide11

Behaviour of Track Quality

Florian Auer, TUGraz, now ÖBB

slide15

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

slide16

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

slide17

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.

slide18

Main results track and turnout:

Cost driver for track maintenance

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%

slide19

cost factor

maximal

average

minimal

radii [m]

Track Costs for Different Radii

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

slide20

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

slide21

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!

slide22

time

quality effect of maintenance action

deterioration

total quality function

threshold value E

technical service life

quality

Behaviour of Track Quality

slide23

time

but

quality

Behaviour of Track Quality

slide24

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!

slide25

time

quality effect of maintenance action

deterioration

total quality function

conform threshold function E

quality

Conform Threshold Function

slide26

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

slide27

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

quality is the key for reduced life cycle cost
Quality is the key for reduced life cycle cost

Summary of Track Strategies

INITIAL QUALITY;QUALITY IN MAINTENANCE;SERVICE LIFE OF TRACK;

The best track is the cheapest,

if high initial quality is transposedinto longer service lifeby adequate maintenance

slide29

Long Term versus Short Term Savings

Strategies for the permanent way aim to enlarge service life of track by quality management of investment and maintenance

 high economical efficiency

short term costs, long term savings

permanent way:

“short” = 5 – 7 years;

“long”= service life = 25 – 50 years

Example

Drainage

RISK

short term savings, long term costs

Reduction of maintenance results in a

reduction of service life

 highly uneconomical

slide30

Example Drainage

not maintaining drainage for

some years!

slide31

Consequences for Outsourcing

Risk sharing depends on contract period

Long term contracts (~ service life of track) result in risks for the maintenance company

Short term contracts (remarkable less than service life of track) result in risks for the track owner

slide32

Consequences for Outsourcing

Contracts have to base on the knowledge concerning quality behaviour of track!

The type of outsourcing should be in line with this knowledge.

slide33

One more problem

Costs due to track closures

Cost of operational hindrances can be twice as much as maintenance cost

but depend on traffic volume, time and duration of track possession, schedule of trains

Optimisation in this field is a day to day work and

difficult to be described in a contract

slide34

Summary

However, outsourcing can be done with relatively small risk,

if consequences of outsourced work are predictable.

Maintenance requirements can be estimated only,knowing the history of track

(initial quality, transport volume, executed maintenance and its quality levels)

slide35

Consequences

Contracts have to take long term quality figures into account, which have to be developed!

RESEARCH

to ensure long term optimisation of track

slide36

Summary

Outsourcing can help to optimise the system railway, if contracts can describe the requirements for maintenance and the consequences in track behaviour

Do we know enough about quality behaviour?

, concerning the

short term behaviour caused by specific track work

Yes

Outsourcing

No, concerning long term behaviour of track superstructure!

Keep in house