designing a new train
DESCRIPTION
By Ian Walmsley, Engineering Development Manager, Porterbrook. Delivered on 19 February 2014 to postgraduate students at the Institute for Transport Studies (ITS) University of Leeds. www.its.leeds.ac.uk/courses/masters/externalseminarsTRANSCRIPT
Designing a New Train
Ian WalmsleyEngineering Development Manager
Porterbrook
1
ROSCO - Our business
Simple business model Long term assets Short term customers Straight Line depreciation Gosplan economics Market should be predictable Policy isn’t Pre-emptive work = high risk
2
What’s good for us?
Stock stays on lease for 35 years Minimum changes to achieve this Rolling stock should be: -
• Reliable• Comfortable• Energy efficient• Low maintenance• Coupling compatible• Suitable for the service• Adaptable for other services
3
An example
High reliability (90,000 mpc) Regenerative Braking (15% less energy) AC traction, low maintenance Compliant to modern safety standards Compliant to disability regulations Air conditioned, good ride, modern interior Perfectly designed for the service it operates
Risk of displacement?
4
5
6
7
8
9
Lesson learned
The best train doesn’t always win
Economy beats quality
10
The Department is particularly interested to see rolling stock used on airport services that is better suited to the needs of airport passengers; Page 81 TSGN ITT Sept 2013
The UK rolling stock market
is neither free nor controlled
11
Market and cost
12
Rail 2% of market Modal transfer CO2 Reduction Capacity of system
Market and cost
13
Train is 15% of industry cost : 12% capital + 3% Maintenance
New train specification – Non-compliances GSM link to PIS Coupling with doors open GOP panel full function Current standards Ride better than 450 Inter-Vehicle damping Noise – new standard Reliability 340,000 MTIN Water tank gauge Insulation infra-red scan Dead haulage in service to 90 mph Light flash guard position 1450mm wide doors Standbacks at doors Footsteps cannot obstruct doors Emergency brake in Neutral No hill start button Sanding – dedicated power supply Low sand indicator Sandbox trace heating WSP failure alarm P12 Profile wheels
Wheelset coating to minimise UAT Option for flange lubrication GSMR radio fitted Maintenance free batteries PIS letter descenders uncompressed Coach letter display in train Side of train PIS displays Wi-Fi remote upload PIS OTMR – GSMR Interface OTMR 7-day recording OTMR flash card download Train Manager’s office 275 seats (270) Emergency light power supplies No bonded glass Ergonomic layout for vehicle on it’s side Seat re-arrange with same body panels Toilet flush with lid up CCTV viewing screen Power close cab door ERTMS space provision and supply
14
New train requirement
Use existing design?• Capacity• Acceleration• 24 tph• New technology• Competition
Produce new design?• Higher risk• Design costs• Safety Case• Potential market• Maintenance cost
15
Safety is a “given”
Rail Group Standards Codes of practice European standards Disabled legislation Fire regulations Accident reports Design review Acceptance bodies
Crashworthiness Materials used Control logic Redundancy Human Factors Stepping distances Electrical Interference Kinematic Envelope
16
Market divisions
High Speed Lines Inter-City Outer Suburban Commuter Inner Suburban Metro
17
What do you want? – Passenger focus
18
What do you want? (Leeds area figures)
19
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Spring Autumn Spring Autumn Spring Autumn Spring Autumn Spring Autumn
Satisfied n/a 86% 84% 78% 83% 87% 87% 78% 75% 78%
Neutral n/a 10% 10% 11% 12% 8% 9% 14% 16% 11%
Dissatisfied
n/a 5% 6% 11% 6% 6% 5% 8% 9% 11%
What do you want?
20
New train decisions - speed
Maximum Speed• 140 mph• 125 mph• 118 mph• 100 mph• 90 mph• 75 mph
Track costs Train weight limits Installed power Braking ability Acceleration No. Powered axles Cost
21
New train decisions - length
3, 4 or 5 car 20m long 23m long 26m long 16.6m long
Platform Lengths Selective Door Opening Station dwell times No. of bogies Weight (Energy, track) Axle load (speed) Expected capacity need
22
New train decisions - doors
End or 1/3 – 2/3? How many? How wide? Standbacks? Swing/Slide Control
Doorway = 8 seats Standbacks = 8 seats Weight (Pass/m2) Speed of operation Reliability FASDO
23
New train decisions - Seats
How many? Legroom Rake angle Armrests Tables
Less seats, More people Crashworthiness Weight Cost Resistance to damage
24
25
Limiting case design
26
24 Trains per hour
Limiting case design
27
Centre section peak operation sets design Bedford – Brighton 2 hrs 15 min Thameslink & Crossrail – same problem Not ideal for off-peak journeys Is there a choice?
The “Platform”
Need to spread design cost Make design flexible around a fixed “platform” New trains around country will be similar Platform designs usually last about 10 years
28
1960s
1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
Maintenance Options - 1 All inclusive deal with manufacturer
• Capital• Depots• Materials• Depot maintenance• Major overhaul
Only specify number of diagrams to be covered Best incentive to minimise maintenance cost Usually most expensive deal – risk brings reward “Wet” lease with ROSCO “Power by the hour”
29
Maintenance Options - 2 “Soggy” lease with ROSCO
• Capital rental• Non-cap for overhaul• Operator maintains• Network Rail facilities• Contract sets responsibility
Operator controls daily availability “Lumpy” overhaul and repair costs smoothed out Terms to fit franchises System used when privatised in 1994
30
Maintenance Options - 3 “Dry” lease with ROSCO
• Capital rental only• No “maintenance reserve”• Operator maintains• ROSCO audits asset• Redelivery inspections
Operator controls all aspects Lower initial cost Higher risk to operator – design and endemic faults Operators often expect support not paid for
31
Residual Value
Franchise operators come and go ROSCO carries residual value Example:-
• 200 vehicles at £1.7m each = £340M investment.• Assumed a 35 year life• After 7 year franchise residual value is 28/35 of £340M• £272M
Risk may be backed off to Government No more diesels
32
Conclusions
Designing a train is a series of compromises Designs will primarily aim at one of 4 markets
• High Speed• Inter City• Suburban• Metro
Adaptable for different routes – the “Platform” Residual Value (i.e. life) very important
33
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVQYldQpeKY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZqsdOEdUuA
34
Thank you
35