efficient intermodal wagons - intermodal- · pdf file• conclusions and benefits ......

Efficient intermodalwagons

Good Practice N°12

KombiConsult GmbH, 04/2013

Good Practice Manual, 04/2013

• Good practice form• Introduction (summary)• Starting position (gaps and challenges)• Concept and components• Application cases • Conclusions and benefits• Further exploitation• Contact• Disclaimer

Contents

Good Practice N°12:

Efficient intermodal wagons


Good practice name Efficient intermodal wagonsfor continental and maritime traffic

Type (3) CT wagons

Involved actors (1) Intermodal operator(2) Railway operator

Commercial / Functional application area

Intermodal transport rail/road

Geographical application area Europe

Status / Time period In operation

COSMOS contact Klaus-Uwe Sondermann (KombiConsult)email [email protected] +49 69 244 32 93 172

Good practice form




The intermodal wagon is an essentialasset for the efficient transport of loadingunits between intermodal terminals. Theaccess to wagons is assured by purchase(from the manufacturers), lease (fromleasing organisation) and hire (fromrailways) for a shorter period of time.

Even if new roles (e.g. wagon keeper) haveappeared by change of legal framework, thefundamental question has to be answered:Which is the most efficient wagon for acertain rail transport?

The present “good practice” investigates thedriving principles and provides practicalexample cases. The basic analysis wasfinanced by the UIC in the scope of theDIOMIS project (www.uic.org/diomis).

Introduction (summary)




• Market develops from integrated railways to specialised undertakings or business units

• Knowledge about growth potential and shortfall of resources is fragmented between various companies

• Time period from identification a capacity or technical need to market is too long (e.g. lack of wagon experienced 2007)

• Investments are large and long lasting (~ 25 years), while transport contracts are short (~ 1 year) and thus creating a financial barrier for small and medium companies

• Regulative changes at EU and multi-national level generate new roles, responsibilities and issue (wagon noise)

Starting position – challenges of the intermodal wagon market



Source: KombiConsult analysis


Fundamental knowledge for the availability and efficiency of different types of intermodal wagon shall be provided in the following charts.

* Owner or long-term user according to GCU (General Contract for the use of freight wagon)

Starting position – development of asset ownership/stakeholders



Wagon

Railway Undertakings

Intermodal Operators

LessorsRailways

Manager

„Wagonkeeper“*

Year ~1965 ~ 1990 ~2005


Starting position – dimensions of intermodal loading units (LU)





Concept and components – intermodal wagons / loading units



Characterisation (overview)



Concept and components – wagon types



• 2-axle-wagonslength: 40’

• 4-axle-wagonslength: 40’, 52’, 60’ (most common wagon type), 73’, 80’ (new)

• 6- & 8-axle-wagonslength: 80’, 90’, 104’

Standard intermodal wagon






• Low-loader-wagons “Multifret”, or “Megafret”2-axle or 4-axle, often 2 wagons with permanent coupling

• Pocket wagons for semi-trailers4-axle wagons for one trailer or 6-axle wagons for 2 semi-trailers

• Dual-use wagons , i.e. flat wagons with stanchions that are suitable for the transport of, containers and swap bodies, wood, steel, other goods to be carried on flat wagons

• Other , e.g. RoLa, ACTS, Modalohr, trailer trains

�� Focus on standard and pocket wagon

Special intermodal wagon






Basic characteristics of intermodal wagons






* The highest combined performance is located in the top right corner of the diagram.

Key performance indicators* of intermodal wagons






Calculation based on 600m wagon train length

Utilisation of maximum train length by loading unit type






2,6

2,9

4,4

5,0

3,1

3,8

3,0

4,3

3,8

3,2

2,8

3,5

3,2

3,2

3,2

0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0

Lgns 40'

Sgkkmss 45'

Sgmns 45'

Sdgmns 45'

Sgjs 60'

Sgns 60'

Sggns 73'

Sggrss 80'

Sggmrss 90'

Sggmrss 104'

Sffggmrrss 104'

Sdggmrss 104'

Sdggmrss 104'

Sdggmrss 104'

Sdggmrss 104'

t/m

104‘ wagon

80 / 90‘ wagon

60‘ wagon

45‘ wagon

Efficiency of wagon (payload/loading-m)



• Given Train length: 600 m− 43 wagons of 40’ ⇒ 86 TEU per train− 30 wagons of 60’ ⇒ 90 TEU per train− 22 wagons of 80’ ⇒ 88 TEU per train− 20 wagons of 90’ ⇒ 80 TEU per train

• Conclusions− By choosing “right” wagon one can gain 10 TEU− 60’ wagons provide best utilisation of train length for the transport of standard

20’, or mix of 20’ and 40’ Ct− 90’ wagon are becoming interesting for 45’ Ct (and SB)− A mix of 60’ and 90’ wagon is of best practical use




Utilisation of train length for 20’/40’/45’ contain ers (ct)



• Given Train length: 600 m− 36 wagons of 52’ � 36 A- / 72 C-type SB per train− 30 wagons of 60’ � 30 A- / 60 C-type SB per train− 20 wagons of 90’ � 40 A- / 40 (80) C-(7.15) type SB− 17 wagons of 104’ � 34 A- / 68 C-type SB per train

• Conclusions− By choosing “right” wagon one can gain 10 LU A-Type

or 12 LU C-Type − 90’ wagons provide best utilisation of train length only for the transport of A-type

SB / and 45’ Ct− 52’ and 104’ wagons provide best utilisation of train length for the transport of

C-type (i.e. 7.82 m) swap bodies, and ST





Utilisation of train length for swap bodies (sb)


• Wagon type for best utilisation of train length depends on the mix of type of swap bodies / containers to be carri ed

• Maritime transport and „company trains“ with high homogeneity of loading units in both directions are much easier to handle than „open“ continental trains, with a variety of customers and thus loading unit types

• An optimum wagon composition selected appropriate for the mix of loading units on a given transport relation is able to carry +12% more Containers or +20% more Swap Bodies compared to an inappropriate wagon. In practical operation the gain will be lower, because the gain will be calculated in comparison to the average wagon mix (and not the worst)





Conclusions on the wagon/train length (1/2)


• The variety of loading units and operational aspects hamper the optimum utilisation of the train length because wagon sets are often exchanged between different relations for operational reasons. It is thus more difficult to maximise the utilisation of the train length

• It is thus, that wagon and their composition in trains is always only a “best compromise ”

• Wagon with variable length did not proof suitable in practice, because they required the availability of shunting enginesduring loading process





Conclusions on the wagon/train length (2/2)


• Utilisation of train weight can be maximised, ifThe efficiency of the wagon - the ratio between the payload and the tare weight - is maximised, or the tare weight per wagon-m is minimized

• Problem:The maximum train weight is also determined by other factors, that may supersede the choice of the optimum weight performing wagon, e.g.

− Minimum weight of empty wagon− Locomotive traction power in conjunction with gradient− Braking conditions in train





Utilisation of train weight





887

941

1.043

1.145

1.114

1.018

921

985

997

943

1.070

1.016

969

1.029

999

0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200 1.400

Lgns 40'

Sgkkmss 45'

Sgmns 45'

Sdgmns 45'

Sgjs 60'

Sgns 60'

Sggns 73'

Sggrss 80'

Sggmrss 90'

Sggmrss 104'

Sffggmrrss 104'

Sdggmrss 104'

Sdggmrss 104'

Sdggmrss 104'

Sdggmrss 104'

900 Kg/m(target)Kg/m


Efficiency of wagon (tare weight/wagon-m)





N°of axles

Type/Example

MaximumWeight

[t]

Tare-Weight[t]

Loading capacity

[t]

2 Lgns 45 12.3 32.7

4 Sgmns 90 18.3 71.5

6 80‘

104‘Pocket

136135135

263235

109102100


Utilisation of wagon weight (1/2)




• Maximum weight of loading units− 20’ container: maximum 24 t− 40’ container: maximum 30.5 t− A-type swap bodies: maximum 34 t− C-type swap bodies: maximum 16 t− Semi-trailer: maximum 38 t

• Conclusions− 2-axle 40’ wagon cannot carry 2 x 20’ Ct of maximum weight− 4-axle 60’ wagon cannot carry 3 x 20’ Ct of maximum weight− 6-axle 80’ wagon provide best utilisation of wagon weight

(4 x 24 t)


Concept and components – wagon typesUtilisation of wagon weight (2/2)


Concept and components – wagon/train weight



• 6-axle 80’ wagon is designed for carrying heavy maritime Ct (109 t payload)

• 4-axle 60’ wagon is designed for carrying lighter goods (70 t)

• 4-axle 45’ wagon is designed for heavy Ct and SB (71.5 t)

• Articulated wagon have a weight limitation when loading their inner places due to the maximum axle load of 22.5 t

• 22 wagons of 135 t would result in a total train weight of 2,970 twhich is exceeding the maximal train weight in most cases⇒ too much for one locomotive

• In practice the weight ratio of a single wagon is more important than the weight of the total train, because the maximum train weight is reached very fast. The operative challenge is to balance light and heavy LUs


Conclusions (1/2)


Concept and components – wagon/train weight



• The latest 60’ wagon (Josef Meyer design) have an empty weight of 17.8 tons and are able to carry three 20’ CT of maximum weight

• A further significant reduction of the empty weight of CT wagon is not expected, in particular since the mayor components are fixed (bogies, bumpers, brakes)

• An increase of the maximum axle load from 22.5 to 25 tons would be much more effective than a reduction in tare weight4-axle wagon: 4 x 22.5 = 90 t

4 x 25 = 100 t∆ + 10 t

60’ wagon: usual tara 20 treduced tara 17.8 t∆ + 2.2 t Source: KombiConsult analysis

Conclusions (2/2)


• Maritime – or container hinterland traffic – is characterized by a comparably large homogeneity of loading units (basically all are fitting into the 20’/40’ grid). The challenge is the mix of short and long and even more empty or light and heavy containers.

• After several year of experiences with 60’ and articulated 80’ and 90’ wagon the intermodal operator METRANS has obviously learned that the average weight of containers is decreasing and consequently (re-)launched the design of a 80’ wagon with only 4 instead of 6 axles. The wagon is generally suited for 4 x 20‘ or 2 x 40‘ thus 4 TEU. In the variant of the VEL wagon* also a variety of 7.45 m swap bodies, 30‘ or 45‘ units can be transported.

• Even that the loading capacity is reduced from 107.5 to 68.5 tons (or 26.8 t/TEU) to 17 t/TEU) the remaining advantages are:Less wheel-sets, brakes, noise and thus maintenance costs

Application cases – example of maritime transport



Source: KombiConsult analysis based on Metrans, Tatravagonka *www.vel-project.eu


Application cases – 80’/4-axle “single” wagon (Sggnss)



Source: Petr Kaderavek


Application cases – 80’/4-axle “single” wagon (Sggnss)



Source: Tatravagonka


Application cases – 80’/6-axle “double” wagon (Sggr/ss)



Source: Tatravagonka


Application cases – technical data 80’ wagon



Source: KombiConsult analysis based on Tatravagonka

Sggrs/ss Sggnss

N°of axles 6 4

Axle load at 100 km/h (t) 22.5 22.5

Tara (t) 27.5 21.5

Payload (t) 107.5 68.5

Total length (m) 26.39 25.94

Loading length (m) 25.15 24.70

Loading deck height (m) 1.155 1.155


Application cases – example of a mega-trailer pocket wagon



• Recent years have shown an increasing trend of using semi-trailers in European road and thus also intermodal transport. The type of mega-semi-trailers providing an internal height of 3m has become the „standard“ equipment

• Kombiverkehr has therefore launched a technical development and demonstration project* in the scope of which a new articulated pocket wagon for mega-semi-trailers was improved, implemented and rolled out to the market

• The loading length of 104‘ allows not only two semi-trailers but also 4 swap bodies of up to 7.82 m, at a loading weight of 85 tons

• The large pocket and safety features provide an efficient handling in the terminals and additionally during rail haulage

• The pocket of the Hupac T5 and Mega II are designed simi larly , but Hupac opt for single wagon, while AAE’s TWIN wagon is made of similar design

*www.bravo-project.com Source: KombiConsult analysis


Application cases – mega-trailer pocket wagon



Source: Kombiverkehr


Application cases – (“double”)-articulated pocket wagon T3000e



Source: Kombiverkehr


Application cases – technical data pocket wagon



Mega II-D MTW TWIN T3000e

N°of axles 8 8 6 6

Axle load at 100 km/h (t) 16 20 22.5 22.5

Tara (t) 36 40 35 35

Payload (t) 2 x 46 2 x 60 100 100

Total length (m) 36.68 38.28 34.03 34.20

Loading length (m) 2 x 16.92 2 x 17.25 2 x 15.76 2 x 16.43

Loading deck height (m) 1.155 0.950 1.155 1.155

Source: KombiConsult analysis based on Hupac, AAE, Kombiverkehr


Application cases – WASCOSA flex freight system



Source: KombiConsult analysis based on Wascosa

• Challenged by the long economic lifetime of the assets and the volatility of the rail freight markets Wascosa presented a concept and prototypes of a light 60’ container wag on(original design by Josef Meyer) and demountable attachments which can be suited to different commodities such as wood, cars, or other

• As the trade mark demonstrates the flexibility is remarkable


Application cases – WASCOSA flex freight system



Source: Wascosa


Application cases – technical data of a light 60’ wagon



Source: KombiConsult analysis based on Wascosa

Criteria 60‘ light

N°of axles 4

Axle load at 100 km/h (t) 22.5

Tara (t) 17.4

Payload (t) 72.6

Total length (m) 20

Loading length (m) 18

Loading deck height (m) 1.155


Conclusions and benefits



• Both the availability and the efficiency of intermodal wagon for intermodal stakeholders has been improved in recent years

• With 60‘/80‘ wagon for maritime traffic and 45‘/90’ and 104‘ (pocket) wagon for continental traffic a series of modern types has been developed and became operational

• Innovative ideas such as the flex freight system and the 80’ single wagon will find their market application, too

• For a given variety of loading options and train parameters the most efficient wagon can be selected by the decision criteria presented above, and coupled to a wagon train, thereby respecting the maximal train parameters on the rail route concerned

• Stakeholders can request such wagon at competent manufacturers, leasing companies or railways – depending on their respective business model, or directly ask the transport of one or multiple loading units from the intermodal operators/railways



• Contacts to referenced examples (by order of appearance):

Further exploitation




Mr. Klaus-Uwe SondermannKombiConsult GmbHZum Laurenburger Hof 7660594 Frankfurt am MainEmail: [email protected]: +49 69 244 32 93 172

Contact




The present good practice presentation has been compiled by one or more COSMOS partner and may contain business sensitive information.You may use the content totally or selectively without changing the content of the single slides, if clearly identifying the source:COSMOS Project, Good Practice Manual, 2013,KombiConsult GmbH, www.cosmos-project.eu

Disclaimer



efficient intermodal wagons - intermodal- · pdf file• conclusions and benefits ......

Documents