Graz University of Technology Institute of Railway Engineering and Transport Economics Sustainable Rail Strategy The Value of Quality Peter Veit June 30 th, 2015 www.ebw.tugraz.at
Challenge Graz, Austria Graz University of Technology Content - Challenge - Quality Behaviour -Track - Life Cycle Costs -Rails -LCC Rail -Summary
Challenge 1 hour high speeds lead to low fault tolerances and thus a high demand of maintenance availability? maintainability? V = 574,8 km/h SNCF 2007
Challenge Austria - Europe availability? maintainability? mixed traffic requires high track accuracy for passenger trains but faces track deterioration due to dense freight traffic Austria: core network 5,000 km, total network 10,000 km 6,500 trains per day some double track sections face 320 trains per day
Challenge common problems: availability, maintainability solution: SUSTAINABILITY technically AND economical quality behaviour life cycle costing (LCC) LCM
Quality Behaviour A good track behaves well, a poor one deteriorates faster. rate of degradation depends on actual quality level quality behaviour of track life cycle cost - structures Q(t) Q 0 e b t costs of operational hindrances investment + maintenance = LCC
Quality Behaviour Q(t) Q 0 e b t investment + maintenance Thus neglected maintenance From the point of view of life cycle costing there are new definitions for investment and maintenance: devaluates the investment done! Investment delivers just initial quality, not service life. Maintenance transforms initial quality into service life.
Quality Behaviour Technical Evaluation Regression analyses based on MDZ A value or standard deviation every 5 meters time measured data since 2000 data of 4,000 km of main track: type and age of track and components, all recording car data, maintenance executed, transport data and alignment quality figure quality figure track km TIME Q(t) track work = Q n e b n t
Quality Behaviour Deterioration Time Quality Figure Renewal Intervention Level
Quality Behaviour Influence of Initial Quality Time Quality Figure Renewal Intervention Level The quality function is shifted horizontally. With the same deterioration rate b the inclination of the tangent at the time 0 (Q0 ) is much bigger only because of the lower initial quality level (Q02 = Q1(t1)).
Maintenance Effects Quality Behaviour Time Quality Figure Renewal Intervention Level
Maintenance Effects Quality Behaviour Renewal Time Quality Figure Proper Maintenance elimination of the failure s cause Intervention Level Wrong Maintenance elimination of the failure s consequence
Threshold Value Quality Behaviour Time Quality Figure Renewal Renewal Service Life Intervention Level
Threshold Value Quality Behaviour Renewal 4 Renewal Time Quality Figure Intervention Level Intervention Level 2 Service Life Intervention Level For a young track the intervention level has to be stricter. At the end of service life the threshold value must be limited.
Track rolling stock transport volume alignment rail, rail pad fastening, sleeper ballast sub layer sub grade drainage TU Graz I Institute for Railway Engineering and Transport Economy I Univ.-Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Dr. Peter Veit Buenos Aires, 30.6.2015
Track Costs which Track? Ballasted track or slab track? Track
Track Track A track for high speed passenger traffic or for heavy haul freight operation? Or for mixed traffic?
Track Track A high loaded track or a branch line?
Track Track A straight track or a curved one?
Track Track And: Which sub-structure? Which superstructure?
Standard Kilometres Life Cycle Costs transport volume [gross tonnes/day, track] track [number] rail profile [ ] Parameters rail steel grade [ ] sleeper [ ] radius [m] rails [ ] subsoil condition [ ] > 70,000 1 60E1 R400HT concrete > 3,000 m CWT good 45,000 70,000 2 54E2 R350HT concrete USP 1,000 m 3,000 m jointed weak 30,000 45,000 2+2 49E1 R260 wooden 600 1,000 m poor 15,000 30,000 R200 400 m 600 m bad 8,000 15,000 250 m 400 m 2,000 8,000 < 250 m < 2,000 Every realistic set pf parameters results on one standard kilometre.
Life Cycle Costs Standard Kilometres Characteristics of the Standard Kilometre Investment Service Life good subsoil conditions 400<R<600 double track Gross tons/day and track Rail Profile Rail Steel Grade 80.000 60E1 R260 Life Span 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 1 Relaying 1 Levelling Lining Tamping 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Spare Part Exchange 1 1 Rail Grinding 1 1 1 1 Rail Exchange 0,3 Joint Maintenance Rail Pad Exchange Spot Repair 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 0,5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1,5 1,5 1,5 1,5 1,5 1,5 1,5 Planned Maintenance Small Maintenance (reactive) Calculating of all track work given in the working cycle including their costs of operational hindrances LIFE CYCLE COSTS
Life Cycle Costs Standard Kilometres standard elements life cycle costs investment and maintenance strategy transport load sub soil sleeper profile steel grade R > 3000 m >70.000 gross/day, track good concrete 60E1 260 double track track work 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 track laying 1$ levelling-lining-tamping 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ grinding 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ 1$ rail exchange sleeper exchange exchange of rail pads joint maintenance small maintenance 0,5 $ 0,5 $ 0,5 $ 0,5 $ 0,5 $ 0,5 $ 0,5 $ 0,5 $ 0,5 $ 1,0 $ 1,0 $ 1,0 $ 1,0 $ 1,0 $ 1,0 $ 1,0 $ 1,0 $ 1,0 $ 1,5 $ 1,5 $ 1,5 $ 1,5 $ 1,5 $ 1,5 $ 1,5 $ 1,5 $ total costs Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ dynamic costs evaluation principle (3% net rate of interest): minimum of dynamic average annual costs including costs of operational hindrances
Life Cycle Costs all influenced by type of superstructure (rail, sleeper, ballast) 1. Initial track quality precondition: subsoil quality and functionality of drainage 2. Switch density 1 EW500 ~ 450 m track 3. Ballast Quality 4. Radii 5. Cost of operational hindrances 7. Traffic density Cost Driver 1:3 6. Length of track work section 8. Quality of rolling stock under linear 1:9 differences in service lives (20% track, 35% turnouts) ± 10% 9. high speed, mixed traffic, and axle load up to 30% up to 20%
Life Cycle Costs General Track Strategies Total Life Cycle Cost (100%) Depreciation 58% Costs of Operational Hindrances 22% Maintenance costs 20% What ever doing: Keep service life high!
Life Cycle Costs General Track Strategies What ever doing: Keep service life high go for high quality!
Life Cycle Costs a kind of summary Reality Model Track is patient, not reacting immediately if treated insufficiently. Track has got a remarkable memory. It remembers insufficient support. Whenever track reacts, service life is already gone. We can t change the characteristics of the elephant, we need to react on it. Yes, we can save a lot of money not executing sufficient maintenance. However, when the elephant doesn t feel well it s already too late TU Graz I Institute for Railway Engineering and Transport Economy I Univ.-Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Dr. Peter Veit Buenos Aires, 30.6.2015
Rails
Different Types of rail rail profile: 60E1 54E2 Rails steel grade: R 400HT R 350HT R 260 improvement improvement base case Improvement in regard of corrugation, RCF, wear and tear
Rails Rail Fatigue
Rails Increasing Rate Head Checks Head Check Increasing rate for steel grade R 260 [mm/100 mio gross tonnes] only suburban traffic only High speed traffic Mixed traffic Straight 1,67 1,20 0,56 R > 1,500 m 1,67 3,60 1,67 500 m < R 1,500 m 3,33 1,67 R 500 m 3,33 0,56 René Heyder (DB-AG) zev-rail 4/2013 Head Check increasing rate R260 : 350HT : 400 HT = 5 : 2 : 1
LCC Rail Standard Elements 60E1: 260-350HT-400HT R > 3,000 m, > 70,000 gross-tonnes per day and track
LCC Rail Standard Elements 60E1: 260-350HT-400HT R 600 1,000 m, > 70,000 gross-tonnes per day and track
LCC Rail Standard Elements 60E1: 260-350HT-400HT R 250 400 m, > 70,000 gross-tonnes per day and track
LCC Rail Results 60E1 Traffic Load [gross tonnes per day and track] > 70,000 45,000 70,000 30,000 45,000 15,000 30,000 R > 3,000 R 260 Radii [metres] 1,000 < R < 3,000 600 < R < 1,000 R 400HT R 400HT R 350HT R 260 400 < R < 600 R 400HT R 260 R 260 250 < R < 400 R 400HT
LCC Rail Standard Elements 60E1 54E2, R260 R > 3,000 m, > 70,000 gross-tonnes per day and track
LCC Rail Results 54E2 Traffic Load [gross tonnes per day and track] > 70,000 45,000 70,000 30,000 45,000 15,000 30,000 R > 3,000 R 260 Radii [metres] 1,000 < R < 3,000 600 < R < 1,000 400 < R < 600 R 400HT R 400HT R 260 R 350HT R 400HT R 260 R 400HT R 350HT R 260 R 260 250 < R < 400 R 400HT However, in all cases higher life cycle cost than 60E1
LCC Track Further Optimisation In the last years many European railway However, this gives further demand on rails with high durability, less wear and less RCF 60E1 400HT companies tested innovative concrete sleepers using elastic footings (Under Sleeper Pads USP). Tests showed that conventional concrete sleepers have less than 10% contact area to the ballast bed. This is the main disadvantage compared with wooden sleepers. The contacted ballast stones break, leading to high initial settlements. USPs triple the contact area reducing initial settlements and follow-up track deterioration. Wherever needed USPs can be used to Getzner enlarge total elasticity of track. This is very helpful for example if substructure is too stiff. Under Austria conditions concrete sleepers with elastic footings proven minimum to double tamping cycles. A prolongation of service life by 25-30% is expected. At ÖBB (Austrian Federal Railways) USP are standard for concrete sleepers since 2009. have
Summary There is nearly nothing on that world, that cannot be done a little bit weaker in quality and thus be sold a little bit cheaper. People just looking on the price fall victim to these offers. It is foolish to pay too much, but it is even worse to pay too little. If you pay too much, you loose some money that s all. If you pay too little, you can loose all if the item you buy doesn't meet its demands. However, the law of economy forbids to get high value for little money. If you agree the cheapest offer, you must reserve some money due to the risk of further additional costs. And if you do that, you have enough money to buy the high quality product. John Ruskin (1819 1900, First Professor for Economics, Oxford)
Thank You for Your Attention! peter.veit@tugraz.at www.ebw.tugraz.at
Graz University of Technology Institute of Railway Engineering and Transport Economics peter.veit@tugraz.at www.ebw.tugraz.at www.ebw.tugraz.at