ALTERNATIVES FOR UPGRADING THE NYKØBING FALSTER - PUTTGARDEN RAILWAY LINE
JOANNA PAULINA LAZEWSKA, S150897 Danmarks Tekniske Universitet
MASTER THESIS AUGUST 2017
ALTERNATIVES FOR UPGRADING THE NYKØBING FALSTER - PUTTGARDEN RAILWAY LINE
MAIN REPORT
AUTHOR JOANNA PAULINA LAZEWSKA, S150897
MASTER THESIS 30 ETCS POINTS
SUPERVISORS STEVEN HARROD, DTU MANAGEMENT ENGINEERING HENRIK SYLVAN, DTU MANAGEMENT ENGINEERING RUSSEL DA SILVA, ATKINS
Alternatives for upgrading the Nykøbing F — Puttgarden railway line
Joanna Paulina Lazewska, s150897, August 14th 2017
Preface
This project constitutes the Master’s Thesis of Joanna Lazewska, s150897. The project is conducted at the Department of Management Engineering of the Technical University of Denmark in the spring semester 2017. The project accounts for 30 ECTS points. The official supervisors for the project have been Head of Center of DTU Management Engineering Henrik Sylvan, Senior Adviser at Atkins Russel da Silva, and Associate Professor at DTU Steven Harrod.
I would like to extend my gratitude to Russel da Silva for providing skillful guidance through the completion of project. Furthermore, I would like to thank Henrik Silvan and Steven Harrod for, in addition to guidance, also providing the project with their broad knowledge about economic and operational aspects of railway.
In addition, I would like to thank every one who has contributed with material, consultations and guidance in the completion of this project, especially Rail Net Denmark that provided materials and plans, as well as guidance at the technical aspects of the project. A special thank is given to Atkins, which has provided office facilities, computer software, and railway specialists’ help throughout the project. It would not be possible to realize project without their help.
Furthermore, I want to thank all friends who have supported and motivated me throughout the project. Finally, I want to place a special thank to my sister and my parents, who made it possible for me to study at DTU and supported me through my whole education process.
Joanna Łażewska Department of Engineering Management August 2017
Abstract
Present thesis investigates an opportunity to upgrade the track section between Nykøbing Falster and Puttgarden up to 250 km/h. The investigation is based on the common European goal of creating common railway network that will ensure smoother and faster travels, and safer and less congested routes.
Proposition of track alignment, designed according to the Danish standards, that would allow to run trains with an operational speed of 250 km/h was presented in the first part of the analysis. It is possible to increase the speed between Nykøbing Falster and Puttgarden up to 250 km/h on the major part of the track section, however some elements on the track cause limitations of the speed. Nykøbing F. station and bridge at the Guldberg Sund do not allow to increase the speed without changing the track geometry. Increasing the speed in this area would require major rebuilt and due to the large cost, the track alignment around Nykøbing station and the bridge remained unchanged, and the speed limitations were introduced instead. Problematic section between Nykøbing F. and Puttgarden is also the Fehmarn Belt tunnel. It is assumed that it is possible to run trains with 250 km/h line speed in the tunnel, however the techni- cal parameters of the tunnel shall be investigated more thoroughly in order to support this statement.
Capacity analysis made for both speed alternatives: 200 km/h and 250 km/h showed greater capacity utilization for the higher line speed. It is due to unused capacity and heterogeneity of the traffic. Neither conflicts nor delays occur in the timetable, however timetable created for the needs of capacity analysis is based on the traffic assumptions and does not reflect realistic departure/arrival times that in reality would have to fit the timetable at the big stations as Copenhagen or Hamburg. In general, travel time for Inter City trains would be decreased by around 3 minutes if the line section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden would operate with the speed of 250 km/h. In the future, when line start the operations and traffic will growth, the line may experience problems with running both high speed passenger trains and slower freight trains. Capacity analysis has been made by using RailSys software, which base calculations on UIC 406 method.
Last part of the analysis revealed that project is considered as not beneficial from socio - economic point of view. In order to estimate the project’s profitability, the cost benefit analysis has been made, considering construction cost calculated for an option when line speed at Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden track section is upgraded in the planning phase, thus only marginal costs and benefits were included in the analysis. Large costs associated with construction and uncertainties associ- ated with the project, and low benefits for users, which is 3 minutes shorter travel time, returns negative results. Therefore, at this point it could be decided to not proceed with the upgrade project.
However, due to the fact that line section between Nykøbing F. and Puttgarden is a part of Scandinavian - Mediterranean TEN-T corridor, and considering other high speed railway projects carried out in Europe, it may be worth to proceed with an investigation of upgrade possibilities at the Fehmarn Belt fixed link, and to invest in high speed line in Denmark.
Contents
1 Motivation for the Project1
2 Background2 2.1 Political Background ...... 2 2.1.1 The Trans European Transport Network ...... 2 2.1.2 A Long-Term Green Transport Plan ...... 3 2.2 Traffic Background ...... 4 2.2.1 Passenger Traffic ...... 4 2.2.2 Freight Traffic ...... 5 2.3 Nykøbing Falster – Puttgarden Track Section ...... 6 2.3.1 Fehmarn Belt Tunnel ...... 7 2.3.2 Passenger Traffic at the Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link ...... 8 2.3.3 Freight Traffic at the Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link ...... 9
3 Norms and Regulations 10 3.1 Standards ...... 10 3.1.1 The National Danish Railway Norms ...... 10 3.1.2 Application of the Railway Regulations ...... 11 3.2 Track Geometry ...... 12 3.2.1 Horizontal Alignment ...... 13 3.2.1.1 Horizontal Curves ...... 13 3.2.1.2 Cant ...... 13 3.2.1.3 Cant Deficiency and Cant Excess ...... 15 3.2.1.4 Transition Curves ...... 16 3.2.1.5 Straight Track Section Between Curves ...... 18 3.2.1.6 Crossovers ...... 18 3.2.2 Vertical Alignment ...... 19 3.2.2.1 Gradient ...... 19 3.2.2.2 Vertical Curves ...... 20 3.3 Ballast Profile ...... 21 3.3.1 Ballast Profile Components ...... 21 3.3.2 Track Center Distance ...... 23 3.3.2.1 Fouling Points ...... 24 3.4 Structure Gauge ...... 24 3.4.1 Structure Gauge in Denmark ...... 24 3.5 Platforms ...... 27 3.5.1 Platforms: Width and Length ...... 28 3.6 Summary of the Norms ...... 30
4 Mathematical Model for Alignment Optimization 31 4.1 Objective ...... 31 4.2 Model Framework ...... 32 4.2.1 Model Input ...... 32 4.2.2 Objective Function ...... 34 4.2.3 Constraints ...... 34 4.2.4 Implementation of the Model ...... 36 4.3 Summary ...... 36
5 Track Geometry Solution 37 5.1 General Considerations about Speed Upgrade ...... 37 5.2 Strategy for Speed Profile Upgrade ...... 38 5.3 The Existing Track Geometry ...... 39 5.4 Upgrading Existing Track to 250 km/h ...... 39 5.4.1 Straightening of the Curves Radii ...... 40 5.4.2 Track Adjustments around Fehmarn Belt Tunnel ...... 41 5.4.3 Vertical Alignment ...... 41 5.5 Summary ...... 42
6 Capacity Theory 43 6.1 The UIC 406 Method ...... 43 6.1.1 Capacity Consumption Calculation ...... 44 6.1.2 Congestion ...... 47 6.1.3 Application ...... 47
7 Capacity Calculations 48 7.1 Traffic Assumptions ...... 48 7.2 RMCon RailSys ...... 49 7.3 Timetable ...... 49 7.3.1 The running time supplement ...... 50 7.3.2 Dwell Time ...... 51 7.3.3 Headways ...... 52 7.3.4 Running Time Calculations ...... 52 7.3.4.1 Time Supplement Percentage ...... 54 7.3.5 Train Types ...... 55 7.3.6 Braking Curves ...... 55 7.3.7 Block sections ...... 56 7.3.8 Speed Profiles ...... 56 7.3.8.1 Speed Profile for Base Line with Line Speed 200 km/h . . . . 56 7.3.8.2 Speed Profile for Speed 250 km/h ...... 57 7.4 Exemplary Timetable ...... 58 7.4.1 Graphical Timetable ...... 59 7.5 Capacity Analysis ...... 60 7.5.1 Robustness of the Timetable ...... 61 7.5.2 Additional Train Paths ...... 62
8 Project Description 64 8.1 Budgeting and Financial Setup ...... 64 8.2 Assumptions ...... 65 8.2.1 Track ...... 65 8.2.1.1 Track layout ...... 65 8.2.1.1.1 Track Layout in the Fehmarn Belt tunnel ...... 66 8.2.1.2 Speed Profile and Curvature ...... 66 8.2.1.3 Superstructure ...... 67 8.2.1.3.1 Track Construction for 250 km/h ...... 67 8.2.1.3.2 Ballast Profile for 250 km/h ...... 67 8.2.1.3.3 Cant Optimization ...... 68 8.2.2 Earth Work ...... 71 8.2.2.1 Soil Handling: Upgrade ...... 71 8.2.2.1.1 Estimation of the Amount of Soil ...... 72 8.2.2.1.2 Drainage ...... 73 8.2.3 Bridges and Constructions ...... 73 8.2.4 Electrification System ...... 74 8.2.5 Power Supply ...... 74 8.2.6 Interlocking and Remote Control ...... 75 8.2.7 IT, Tele and Transmission Systems ...... 76 8.2.8 Constructions ...... 76 8.2.8.1 Platform Design for 250 km/h: Nykøbing Falster ...... 76 8.2.8.2 Platform Design for 250 km/h: Holeby ...... 77 8.2.9 Areas ...... 79 8.2.9.1 Temporary Expropriation ...... 79 8.2.9.2 Permanent Expropriation ...... 80 8.2.10 Forestry ...... 80 8.2.11 Additional Considerations ...... 80 8.2.12 Cross-disciplinary Costs ...... 80 8.2.13 Fehmarn Belt Tunnel ...... 81 8.3 Summary of Project Description ...... 81
9 Project Evaluation and Budgeting 83 9.1 Construction Cost ...... 83 9.2 Unit Prices ...... 83 9.3 Financial and Socio-Economic Profitability ...... 84 9.4 Cost Benefit Analysis ...... 84 9.4.1 Benefits ...... 84 9.4.2 Evaluation of the Results ...... 85 9.4.3 Socio-economic analysis for the construction cost estimated for upgrading already existing line ...... 87 9.4.4 Summary of Financial and Socio-Economic Profitability ...... 88 9.5 Risk Plan ...... 88 9.6 Project Summary ...... 89 9.7 Discussion and Recommendations ...... 90 List of Figures
2.1 The nine Core Network Corridors of the Trans–European Transport Network, the Scandinavian–Mediterranean corridor marked pink [21] ...... 4 2.2 Changes in number of travel on main lines with comparison to year 2010. Color marking represents changes in % while the figures indicates the total change in million travels per year [1] ...... 5 2.3 Ringsted – Fehmarn line with the Nykøbing Falster – Puttgarden track section [1] 7 2.4 Location of the Fehmarnbelt tunnel [17] ...... 8
3.1 Difference in centrifugal lateral acceleration without and with cant [11] . . . . 14 3.2 Classical cross section of ballast profile [38] ...... 22 3.3 Different measurements of track center distances with consideration of tracks’ geometry [5] ...... 23 3.4 Fouling point placement in accordance to the track geometry [5] ...... 24 3.5 Difference between structure gauge for the train moving on straight track and in the curve [16] ...... 25 3.6 Difference between structure gauge for the train moving on straight track and in the curve [16] ...... 26 3.7 Nominal overhead contact wire height, loading gauges and intermodal gauges in the German-Scandinavian corridor [12] ...... 26 3.8 Parameters describing the placement of the platform along track [39] . . . . . 27 3.9 Location of danger areas and freeways on platform’s islands [39] ...... 29
6.1 Capacity balance [33] ...... 44 6.2 Graphical method for compression [33] ...... 45 6.3 Components of the block occupation time [33] ...... 45 6.4 Elements incorporated in the capacity consumption [33] ...... 46
7.1 Process steps for planning railway traffic in RailSys [40] ...... 49 7.2 Diagrams illustrating headway time’s as a functions of block section’s length and gradient [32] ...... 52 7.3 The relationship between gradient and running time profile ...... 53 7.4 Speed profile for right track of the line section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden for line speed 200 km/h ...... 57 7.5 Speed profile for right track of the line section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden for line speed 250 km/h ...... 58 7.6 Exemplary timetable for line speed 250 km/h ...... 60
8.1 Rail Net Denmark’s phase model based on [6] ...... 65 8.2 Typical cross section for straight track with speed 250 km/h (all dimensions in [mm]) ...... 68 8.3 Typical cross section for track with cant for speed 250 km/h (all dimensions in [mm]) (additional ballast marked blue) ...... 69 8.4 Cross section for straight track with speed 200 km/h (all dimensions in [mm] if not stated differently) [9] ...... 70 8.5 The basis of the ETCS L2 signalling system [44] ...... 75 8.6 Cross section of the platform at Holeby located along the side track (all dimensions in [mm] if not stated differently) [9] ...... 79
9.1 Comparison of the results for 2 additional options ...... 87 List of Tables
2.1 Possible travel times before and after line upgrades and construction of the tunnel [17] ...... 9
3.1 Track engineering rules for horizontal curves [11][22] ...... 13 3.2 Track engineering rules for cant design [11][22] ...... 15 3.3 Track engineering rules for cant deficiency and cant excess design [11][22] . . 16 3.4 Track engineering rules for transition curves design [11][22] ...... 18 3.5 Track engineering rules for crossovers [11][22] ...... 19 3.6 Track engineering rules for gradient design [11][22] ...... 20 3.7 Track engineering rules for vertical curves design [11][22] ...... 21 3.8 Requirements for cross profiles for major rebuilds, upgrades and new installations [3]...... 22 3.9 Minimum values for track center distance [5][22] ...... 23 3.10 Supplement for structure gauge in horizontal and vertical curves 3.5 ...... 25 3.11 Nominal offset of platforms [39] ...... 28 3.12 Minimum width of danger zones bsik and freeways boph [39] ...... 29
4.1 Weight of penalties assigned to particular constrain in order to minimize the use of exceptional regulations by model ...... 32 4.2 Required input data for each curve ...... 34
5.1 Total number of exceptional regulations used for upgraded line speed (250 km/h) 40
6.1 Percentage of maximum capacity consumption according to UIC [33] . . . . . 47
7.1 Running time supplements in Denmark, compared to UIC recommendations, 2010 [43] ...... 51 7.2 Running times for different types of trains ...... 54 7.3 Difference between minimum running times when applying UIC and danish recommendations ...... 54 7.4 Specifications for types of trains used in timetable ...... 55 7.5 Braking rates for particular train types and speeds [24] ...... 56 7.6 Capacity calculations ...... 61 7.7 Additional train paths found by RailSys ...... 63 8.1 Summary of the ballast and sub ballast volumes needed for upgrade project, based on schematic overview and cross sections ...... 69 8.2 Track displacement size in particular track sections between Nykøbing F. and Fehmern Belt ...... 71 8.3 Length of the track section and type of work required for track displacement . . 72 8.4 Amount of soil needed for increasing the track center distance ...... 73 8.5 Platform height and offset for Nykøbing station ...... 77 8.6 Parameters describing new platform in Holeby [22][4] ...... 78
9.1 Estimation of the construction cost for two considered upgrade options . . . . . 83 9.2 Summary of cost, benefits and investment criteria of conducted CBA ...... 85 9.3 Comparison of results of different scenarios included in sensitivity analysis . . 85 9.4 Values introduced to the analysis in order to get positive evaluation of the CBA 86 Abbreviations List
CEN European Committee of Standardization DMI Driver Machine Interface EC European Commission EU European Union ERTMS European Rail Traffic Management System ETCS European Train Control System pax passengers RND Rail Net Denmark TC Transition Curve TEN-T Trans-European Transport Network TER Track Engineering Rules TSI Technical Specifications for Interoperability
1 Motivation for the Project
The thesis presents the project that analyze the possibility to upgrade track section from Nykøbing Falster (Denmark) to Puttgarden (Germany). Section is a part of Scandinavian - Mediterranean TEN-T corridor that is going to connect the south and north of the Europe, ensuring shorter travel time, as a train ferry connection between Rødby and Puttgarden will be replaced with the tunnel through Fehmarn Belt. Line between Ringsted and Puttgarden will be upgraded up to 200 km/h and equipped with ERTMS level 2 system. Construction of the Fehmarnbelt fixed link will attract traffic from other routs and may increase demand on the line. More train require more capacity, and hence higher speed.
Big railway projects should be planned taking into an account future development and changes. Fehmarnbelt fixed link is going to accommodate great number of freight trains and increase passenger traffic. With the time the number of trains can be continuously increasing up to the point when utilization of the capacity rise enough to classify the line as congested.
Assuming that future problems can be solved now, the possibility to upgrade the line to higher speed should be considered. Sweden is planning a new high speed line from Stockholm to Malmo. Line will be built for the operational speed in the range of 250 km/h - 320 km/h. Also Denmark is during the process of building first high speed line between Copenhagen and Ringsted. Upgrade up to 250 km/h on Fehmarnbelt fixed link would create an international high speed corridor connecting Scandinavia with the central Europe.
The upgrade project presented in the thesis investigates the possibilities for creating high speed line section between Nykøbing Falster and Puttgarden by analyzing:
• Propositions of changes in track alignment that would have to be made in order to increase line speed up to 250 km/h.
• Impact on the network capacity after introducing upgraded Nykøbing Falster - Rødby line and the Fehmarn Belt tunnel.
• Possible gains according to travel time savings and changes in capacity utilization on the line associated with increased line speed.
• Financial and socio - economic profitability.
The goal of the project is to show if possibility to prepare the line for speed 250 km/h should be taken into an account and discuss the methods and tools involved to substantiate the decision made.
1 2 Background
This chapter presents the factors that initiated and motivated the infrastructure changes on considered railway line. The chapter describes the current situation in passenger as well as freight transport in Denmark, but also focus on future plans and perspectives in these fields. Route going from Sweden to Germany, through Copenhagen and Fehmarn Belt is important section for international trade of passengers and goods between northern and southern Europe. Introducing Fehmarn Belt fixed link will significantly decrease travel time between Rødby and Puttgarden and open new possibilities for passengers and freight transport, as 160 kilometers detour through Jutland can be avoided. The more direct Fehmarn Belt connection is expected to shift traffic from Great Belt fixed link and therefore ease capacity constraints [37]. The chapter is divided into three sections that concern political background, traffic background and a presentation of the Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link.
2.1 Political Background
The European transport network is going through numerous changes in order to create one big integrated system that connects whole Europe but also contribute in further sustainable development. In 2011 European Commission (EC) published White Paper on transport that states objectives for this development. Nine Core Network Corridors will connect Europe but also boost economical growth and fill missing connection between 28 member states of European Union (EU), providing efficient, future-oriented and high-quality transport services for citizens. Fehmarn Belt fixed link is the part of the Scandinavian - Mediterranean Corridor that ensures interoperable connection between Stockholm (Sweden) and Palermo (Italy) [21]. White Paper on transport does not particularly focus on development plans for Denmark but rather for the Europe as a whole. However Denmark, as a member of European Union, follows main goals and initiatives that are formulated in accordance with the European goals.
2.1.1 The Trans European Transport Network In year 1992 European Commission published the first White Paper in order to develop the universal transport policy in European Union countries. The main goals were to overcome difficulties that constraint cross boarder transport and to introduce open transport market. Hence idea of integrating national transport networks in Europe was born, known as the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) [19]. The implementation process went smooth for road traffic, that managed to achieve most of its goals around new millennium. However it was not that easy for railway sector that is diverse and characterized by national systems, which makes it difficult to develop interoperability within European countries.
In 2001 a new document White Paper on transport was formulated, focusing on issues as road congestion and environmental aspects of increased passenger and freight traffic. Trans- portation sector adopted the "sustainability strategy" and, as a part of it, plans to shift the
2 CHAPTER 2. BACKGROUND share of road traffic to rail [20]. Evaluation of the strategy was made in 2011 and showed successful performance in road sector, however railway system still struggled with open market and sustainability issues. In order to improve the situation for rail, the European Commission formulated long-term strategy for transport sector, with the main objective of improving the international railway network and increasing rail’s attractiveness over other means of transport. The document assumed 50% road to rail shift in freight transport by year 2050, and more than 30% of medium passenger trips shift to rail as well as 30% of truck transport for distances exceeded 300 km by year 2030 [20]. In order to implement the long-term strategy, the interoperable TEN-T core network connecting whole Europe from east to west, and from north to south was introduced. The TEN-T network consist of 30 priority projects, where 18 of them focus particularly on railway infrastructure development. The international railway network should be based on common European norms and standards, and adapt the same signalling program that will ensure interoperability within Europe. The main goals are removing bottlenecks, filling missing cross-boarder connections as well as provide smoother and faster travels, and safer and less congested routes. Additionally, the possibility of greater competition within the rail sector appears by opening the market for different railway operators. Another important goal to be achieved is promotion of freight corridors, hence a transfer of freight transportation from roads to railway [20].
The TEN-T scheme can be seen in figure 2.1. The corridor marked pink is known as the Scandinavian-Mediterranean corridor and runs from Stockholm to Palermo, through Denmark either via Jutland and Great Belt or across Sealand and Fehmarn Belt. It operates both passenger and freight traffic and provides main connection between Scandinavia and the rest of the continent. Railway TEN-T projects are carried with compatibility with Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSI) formulated by European Agency for Railways. The core network is to be completed by 2030.
2.1.2 A Long-Term Green Transport Plan The Danish Government states that they want society that combines economic growth and high mobility with clean environment, reduced traffic noise and measures to combat climate change [45]. Implementation of this vision became real in 2009 when the largest political parties in Denmark agreed to develop a green transport policy. Main goal is to upgrade railway network, hence decrease a travel time between the largest cities in Denmark. First high speed line Copenhagen- Ringsted and One-Hour model that ensures travel time of one hour between main danish cities were introduced. Moreover, the CO2 emission is to be reduced by making railway independent from fossil fuels [20]. Moreover, electrification of railway lines and implementation of ERTMS signalling system will make danish system compatible with European railway networks.
3 CHAPTER 2. BACKGROUND
Figure 2.1: The nine Core Network Corridors of the Trans–European Transport Network, the Scandinavian– Mediterranean corridor marked pink [21]
2.2 Traffic Background
In upcoming years number of infrastructure investments are to be made in order to improve reliability, mobility and flexibility. Moreover, Denmark will be the first country to fully implement ERTMS signalling system that will ensure interoperability within other European countries [37]. With ongoing and future changes by year 2050 the freight rail transport is about to increase with 80% while passenger traffic is about to increase by 51% [14].
2.2.1 Passenger Traffic The Green Transport Policy focuses on promoting public transport and upgrade of railway system in order to create reliable and safe network [45]. Traffic plan for the Danish railway for years 2012-2027 presents an overview of the possible future changes in traffic as well as in number of passengers. Figure 2.2 shows forecast made by Danish Transport Authority that presents increase in passenger traffic on main railway lines in a future years, thus increased capacity, reduced travel times and higher comfort are crucial.
4 CHAPTER 2. BACKGROUND
Figure 2.2: Changes in number of travel on main lines with comparison to year 2010. Color marking represents changes in % while the figures indicates the total change in million travels per year [1]
Number of railway projects that are conducted in Denmark, such as electrification, high speed rail and many modernization projects will lead to the further increase in number of passengers, thus the options of further development of danish rail network should be investigated thoroughly.
2.2.2 Freight Traffic Location of the Denmark on the map of Europe makes it a "natural" choice for a transit country for good exchange between north and south of the Europe. Major cargo flow moves along the axis going from Scandinavia, through Denmark to the south of the continent. Germany is the second largest trading partner for Nordic countries, and Scandinavia depends on around one third on international trade, thus it is of great importance to constantly improving the connection between Scandinavia and the rest of the Europe.
5 CHAPTER 2. BACKGROUND
Plan for freight transport assumes 80% increase in demand between years 2005 and 2050, that will take over the road freight traffic [47]. In order to be able to handle such an increase in freight traffic, railway infrastructure requires more capacity, effectivity and strong international connections.
Nowadays main freight connection which crosses Denmark from the north runs through Øresund fixed link to Copenhagen, and further to Germany by the Great Belt fixed link. Freight train ferry connection between Rødby and Puttgarden is not in use since 1997 and is going to be replaced by Fehmarn Belt fixed link.
2.3 Nykøbing Falster – Puttgarden Track Section
The track section between Nykøbing Falster and Puttgarden is a part of the Ringsted – Fehmarn project which is a part of one of the main railway lines in Denmark, connecting two important cities: Copenhagen and Hamburg. The section is about 60 kilometers long, consists of single track with the maximum speed of 120 km/h between Nykøbing F. and Rødby Havn, and 2 stations located along the line: Nykøbing Falster and Rødby. Nowadays physical connection between Rødby and Puttgarden does not exist and in order to get through Fehmarn Belt a train has to be transported by a ferry, which causes bottlenecks and increases travel time. It has been decided that the line will be upgraded to double track with the line speed of 200 km/h. Rødby and Puttgarden will be connected by tunnel through Fehmarn Belt. After the upgrade, Ringsted-Fehmarn line will be a part of important European railway network and one of the fastest lines in Denmark [2]. The considered track section can be seen at the figure 2.3.
Line speed on the Fehmarn Belt fixed link is planned to be upgraded up to 200 km/h. Works on the line on Lolland will be coordinated with opening of the tunnel. The line section starts at the station in Nykøbing Falster that is located on the Falster island. The line continues through the Guldborg Sund bridge that connects Falster with Lolland. When the project is finished, trains will run through a new station in Holeby, located to the north from Rødby, and go to the Puttgarden in Germany through Fehmarn Belt tunnel.
New station in Holeby will consist of two platforms, pedestrian bridge, bus stops and other required facilities. The existing station in Rødby will be closed and the existing railway connection to the station will be decommissioned [7].
Other alternatives for line speed 160 km/h and 250 km/h were also considered for fixed link, but after initial analysis the speed of 200 km/h was chosen as the best one. However, geometry of track at Lolland is not very complex, thus more thorough analysis of this section, including new track alignment, capacity analysis and cost-benefit analysis, is made in this thesis.
6 CHAPTER 2. BACKGROUND
Figure 2.3: Ringsted – Fehmarn line with the Nykøbing Falster – Puttgarden track section [1]
Boundaries of the upgrade project are Nykøbing Falster station and German coast at island Fehmarn. The project refers to a Puttgarden as a boundary, as it is the name of the ferry harbour where train ferries dock. No track section placed on the Fehmarn island is taken into consideration in the upgrade project due to different national regulations.
2.3.1 Fehmarn Belt Tunnel Fehmarnbelt tunnel connecting Denmark and Germany is a crucial part of fixed link that will decrease the travel time between two countries from 1 h 17 min to 7 minutes, as trains will not have to be carried by a ferry anymore. The link will be about 18 kilometers long immersed tunnel and will be the world’s longest rail and road tunnel of this type. Construction period is estimated to be 8.5 years, with the budget of 55.1 billion danish kroner (2015 prices). The loans that finance construction will be repaid from revenues from the link, as the Fehmarn Belt will be user - financed. The tunnel itself will consist of four lane motorway with maximum speed of 110 km/h and two electrified rail tracks with line speed of 200 km/h [25]. The Fehmarnbelt will con- nect Rødby Havn on Lolland (Denmark) and German island of Fehmarn, as shown at the figure 2.4.
The tunnel will consist of 79 individual elements made of hollow concrete that will be cast on land and assembled section by section in order to form the tunnel. Moreover, the Fehmarnbelt will include 10 special elements with additional lower floor to use for tunnel operation and maintenance. These components will be located every two kilometers and will make the link
7 CHAPTER 2. BACKGROUND
Figure 2.4: Location of the Fehmarnbelt tunnel [17] cheaper and easier to maintain. Works on the tunnel will start when the construction permit from German side will be obtained [25], which is expect to happen in 2017 (with a possibility of delay till 2019).
Prices of the tickets for going through the Fehmarn Belt tunnel are planned in a way that the revenue will enable the link to repay itself within a period of 36 years. The lifespan for the tunnel is estimated to be 120 years and during this time the revenue will finance its maintenance and operation. The price of the ticket is estimated but not decided yet. The average price for passenger car (2015 prices) is assessed to be 494 DKK, which is equivalent to current cost of a ticket on the Rødby-Puttgarden ferry service. Price for lorries is estimated to be 2,092 DKK (including VAT) [25].
In April 2009, Minister of Transport in Denmark appointed Femern A/S to conduct preparatory work, investigations and the planning of the Fehmarnbelt fixed link. The Fermen A/S is a part of Sund&Bælt Holding A/S, and is 100 percent owned by the Danish Ministry of Transport [25].
2.3.2 Passenger Traffic at the Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link Fehmarn Belt fixed link, additional line electrification and upgrade to double track on the line between Nykøbing F. and Puttgarden will significantly decrease travel time between Copenhagen and Hamburg. Nowadays around 5,500 vehicles cross the Fehmarn Belt everyday on the ferry service. When finished, the traffic is expected to rise to approx. 11,000 in the period of 5 years after opening year [37]. In 2010 Danish Transport Authority estimated the number of passengers
8 CHAPTER 2. BACKGROUND crossing Fehmarn Belt with rail to be in a range of 300,000 and 400,000 per year, and is expected to grow when the rail service is improved and passengers switch to railway from other means of transport [13]. Moreover, the fixed link is assumed to attract traffic from alternative routs such as Great Belt, Gedser - Rostock ferry and other ferry routes across the Baltic Sea.
Comparison of travel times for current situation and when the construction of the tunnel and speed upgrade up to 200 km/h will be done are presented in table 2.1.
Table 2.1: Possible travel times before and after line upgrades and construction of the tunnel [17] Travel time (2017) Future travel time Time saved Copenhagen - Hamburg 4 h 44 min 2 h 40 min 2 h 4 min Copenhagen - Nykøbing F. 1 h 33 min 57 min 36 min
Increased demand for passenger transport through Fehmarn Belt will also require higher number of trains, that will rise from 6 to 20 passenger trains per direction per day. The number of passengers crossing Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link by rail is expected to increase from 600,000 per year to around 1,100,000 in the opening year [46]. Shorter travel times and higher frequency between Hamburg and Copenhagen are expected to increase attractiveness compared to flight travel and create new opportunities for business and tourists [25].
2.3.3 Freight Traffic at the Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link Building Fehmarn Belt tunnel will create a shorter connection for freight trains going from Scandinavia towards Germany and further to the South of the continent. Nowadays, freight is often transported by main roads to and from ferries at Rødby, while trains travel through Great Belt. With the Fehmarnbelt fixed link, around 160 kilometers shorter railway and road connection will be established.
The future timetable accommodates two freight trains paths per hour per direction [12]. Approxi- mately 61 freight trains will cross Fehmarnbelt fixed link in both directions, every day for 255 days a year. This number includes around 85% of traffic transferred from the Great Belt. This number is expected to increase by around 1.4% annually for approximately 25 years after opening year [46]. The big challenge for Fehmarn Belt corridor will be to accommodate slow freight trains and high speed passenger trains in the timetable, especially in the future, when the demand for passengers trips and for transport of goods will increase. Designing the track alignment shall be thought through, taking into an account future traffic predictions, in order to enable trains’ overtaking.
9 3 Norms and Regulations
Upgrading the speed on the main railway line is a project of great importance that will have an impact on national and European scale. In order to achieve high speed, decrease maintenance costs, and most importantly - ensure passengers’ safety, the new track geometry has to be compatible with a number of engineering rules and specifications.
The chapter is based on Danish requirements established by Rail Net Denmark (RND). Presented regulations focus on line speed of 250 km/h but also include specifications for lower speed ranges.
3.1 Standards
Standards in railway design define the parameters and requirements that a railway line has to comply with. As Europe consist of many different countries, the set of regulations vary between each of them. The European Union’s goal is to introduce one common system that will ensure interoperability and connect Europe with one big Trans-European Transportation Network, thus all member states had to adjust their national regulations in order to comply with European Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSI). However, national rules still play the main role when a new railway line is designed or when an existing line is upgraded.
Current chapter focus on Danish Track Rules only, as this set of rules will be used as a guideline for speed upgrade at Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden section. The reason for not including TSI as a primary set of regulations is that the goal of TSI is technical interoperability, neither safety nor life cycle cost. As written in first chapters of TSI:
"The limiting values set out in this TSI are not intended to be imposed as usual design values, however the design values must be within the limits set out in this TSI"
Using TSI only as a guideline may lead to designing railway that cannot be used for the designed speed because of discomfort. However, TSI specifications will be presented together with Danish rules in order to check that limits for national regulations are within the limits of European ones.
3.1.1 The National Danish Railway Norms Rail Net Denmark is in charge of operating, maintaining and developing the state-owned infras- tructure, which functions with accordance to Danish technical specifications. These specifications ensure that railway infrastructure is designed in a way that provide compromise in terms of safety and technical rules, but also comply with interoperability requirements. The Danish standards’ key aspects include: safety, economy, environment, and comfort and demands of customers [11].
Recent Rail Net Denmark regulations are divided into three regulation levels [11]:
10 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
• BN1 are specific regulations, meeting requirements established by national and interna- tional authorities which Rail Net Denmark must comply with, as well as corresponding requirements (railway safety) set by Rail Net Denmark which must be approved by the Danish Transport, Construction and Housing Authority.
• BN2 are technical regulations which comply with BN1 regulations and which Rail Net Denmark’s management has defined as supplementary or aggravating business requirements.
• BN3 are technical guidelines and specific instructions to ensure compliance with relevant BN1 and BN2 regulations. BN3 regulations may be disregarded by project managers if BN1 and BN2 requirements are met otherwise.
The EN standards distinguish national rules in every of the 28 European Union countries and were developed by the European Committee of Standardization (CEN). EN standards relevant to railway technology were adopted by Rail Net Denmark and can be seen in a reference list in each technical rule. EN standards are available through Danish Standards.
The newest version of Track Engineering Rules (TER), published on 1st of May 2017 is presented in this chapter.
3.1.2 Application of the Railway Regulations The choice of which regulations will be used is influenced by the type of work that will be carried out on line. In railway infrastructure projects the following types of work can be identified:
• Construction of the new line.
• Track renewal: exchange of subsystem that will not influence the system’s performance. Track renewal, unlike track maintenance work, can be performed in order to adjust the line to the TSI requirements.
• Track upgrade: exchange of subsystem that leads to improvement in the system’s perfor- mance.
• Track maintenance.
Upgrade project for Fehmarn Belt fixed link will be consider from two points of view:
1. Project is conducted for already existing railway line with a line speed of 200 km/h.
2. Project considers modifications that would have to be implemented in the planning phase of the ongoing 200 km/h upgrade project, in order to prepare line for design speed of 250 km/h.
Therefore, the track works included in this project will be upgrade of the existing track, and an adequate requirements will be used for this type of works.
11 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
3.2 Track Geometry
Presented chapter describes requirements that have to be implemented in the line alignment design phase. Track geometry determines the line speed and hence the line category. Line category is a way to classify the existing lines, generally based on type of traffic characterized by parameters as gauge, axle load, line speed etc. Track geometry can be divided into [11]:
• The horizontal alignment (track alignment) that identifies how the track is situated according to the horizontal level. Horizontal alignment consist of following geometrical elements: – Straight lines – Circular curves – Transition curves
• The vertical alignment (longitudinal profile) that identifies how the track is situated according to the vertical level. Vertical alignment consist of following geometrical elements: – Straight lines – Circular curves (vertical curves)
Rail Net Denmark regulations stated for each element of the track alignment are divided into three limiting categories, which are:
• Requested Regulations Set of rules that should be applied for new lines and track renewal. The main goals of using requested values are to reduce wear and increase the level of ride comfort.
• Standard Regulations Set of rules that should be used for new lines and track renewal. Using standard values ensure compromise between ride comfort level and wear.
• Exceptional Regulations Set of rules used in a case when it is impossible or too expensive to apply standard regulations rules. Permission from administrator from Rail Net Denmark has to be obtained in order to use these rules in track alignment design. Using exceptional values cause reduction in level of ride comfort and increase wear.
12 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
3.2.1 Horizontal Alignment Following sections include engineering requirements for parameters that define the horizontal alignment’s design.
3.2.1.1 Horizontal Curves Curves on the horizontal level are used in order to change the track direction. There is a strong connection between radius of the curve and the line speed, thus generally curve should be designed with the radius as large as possible, but not exceeding 25,000 meters. The lowest allowed values for radius depend on track denomination and set of regulations used.
Track engineering rules identify radius values for main tracks and through tracks, other train routs, and sidings.
Regulations regarding length of the circular curves are connected to new constructions and conditions associated with it, however, they should be designed as long as possible in order to ensure ride comfort. Design rules for horizontal curves’ radii as well as minimum length of curved and straight track elements can be seen in table 3.1 .
Table 3.1: Track engineering rules for horizontal curves [11][22] Rail Net Denmark TSI INF Element Req. Std. Exp. Minimum Horizontal Radius Rh [m] Main Track ≥ 700 ≥ 300 ≥ 150 ≥ 150 Along platforms - ≥ 300 (1 - ≥ 300 (2 Length of Elements Lk, Ls [m] V ≤ 200km/h ≥ 0.4V ≥ 0.25V ≥ 0.20V (3 - 200 < V ≤ 250km/h ≥ 0.67V ≥ 0.67V ≥ 0.40V (3 -
Comments: 1) On new lines only; there are no other standard regulations for existing track along platforms. 2) Lk,s ≥ 20 meters 3) Lk is allowed to be reduced to 0.10V in case when cant deficiency I is smaller than 40 mm in relation to one of the closest curves/straight tracks.
3.2.1.2 Cant Train moving in a curve with particular radius experience centrifugal lateral acceleration that can cause passenger discomfort, wagon load displacement, and high lateral forces on the track, track structure and substructure.
In order to balance centrifugal acceleration following actions can be taken:
13 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
• Designing the track alignment with the biggest possible radius, so the superelevation is not needed.
• Using cant in curves in order to compensate lateral acceleration by the gravity component.
• Introducing speed restrictions on line.
In case when radius in the curve cannot be extended to the large value, the smaller radius has to be used for the line design, thus the curve has to be built with a cant to reduce or eliminate centrifugal acceleration’s influence. Establishing cant value should be based on distribution between fast and slow trains. Using cant improves ride comfort for passengers and horizontal loading of the track.
Superelevation is obtained by elevating outer rail while keeping the inner one at the same level. Distribution of the forces for vehicle moving on a curved track with or without cant can be seen in figure 3.1. The train moving in the curve is subjected to the force of gravity g and centrifugal V 2 acceleration R , that gives the resultant K. On the track without cant the resultant K affects the outer wheel of the train resulting in increased wear. When the train moves in the curve with cant, the centrifugal acceleration affecting train is lower, thus the value of resultant K is lower as well and pointed towards the center of the boogie. Such distribution of the forces decreases the wear of the rail and outer wheel.
Figure 3.1: Difference in centrifugal lateral acceleration without and with cant [11]
Cant for passenger traffic can be calculated by using formula 3.1.
V2 h = 11.8 × (3.1) a r
14 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
Where: V - running speed [km/h] R - curve radius [m] Requirements for cant design according to RND and TSI can be found in table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Track engineering rules for cant design [11][22] Rail Net Denmark TSI INF Element Req. Std. Exp. Mixed Passenger Cant h [mm] V 2 (1 (2 (3 Plain Track h = 8 × R ≤ 115 ≤ 160 ≤ 180 ≤ 160 ≤ 180 Track at platforms - ≤ 60 ≤ 110 ≤ 110
Comments: R−50 1) To eliminate a risk of derailment in small radii curves, h = 1.5 shall always be observed. 2) Tracks on stone ballast railways. 3) Tracks on stone ballast railways dedicated for passenger traffic.
Cant is used on a tracks where the running speed V ≥ 50 km/h. On the track with slower traffic cant is usually not used.
3.2.1.3 Cant Deficiency and Cant Excess Cant deficiency is defined as a difference between ideal cant and an actual cant used in a curve [18]. Ideal cant only applies to one particular running speed thus it can be only applied for lines with uniform traffic. In reality railway line is used by both passenger and freight traffic which run with different speeds which means that using ideal cant for the high speed would cause excess cant for slower trains. Furthermore, this would contribute in production of excess wear on the lower rail. Taking both types of traffic into the consideration, the optimal value of cant deficiency has to be accepted taking into an account flanging of the high rail effect and wear of the rail head.
Cant deficiency I influence the ride comfort for passengers. The experience from Swedish comfort tests showed that 20% of passengers felt discomfort at the following parameters’ values [11]:
• Walking: I 106 mm • Walking: dI/dt 41 mm/s
• Standing: I 118 mm • Standing: dI/dt 77 mm/s
• Sitting: I 165 mm • Sitting: dI/dt 112 mm/s
Cant deficiency I can be calculated from the formula 3.2.
11.8V2 I = − h (3.2) R
15 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
Where: V - running speed [km/h] R - curve radius [m] h - cant [mm]
In curves with large radii there is usually a significant difference between maximum allowed speed for passenger trains and minimum speed for freight traffic. Slow running freight trains moving in a curve with substantial cant excess produce the high load on the low rail. The formula 3.3 can be used in order to find the cant excess E for the lowest traffic speed:
11.8V2 E = h − (3.3) R
Where: V – running speed [km/h] R – curve radius [m] h – cant [mm]
Requirements for cant deficiency and cant excess according to RND and TSI can be seen in table 3.3.
Table 3.3: Track engineering rules for cant deficiency and cant excess design [11][22] Rail Net Denmark TSI INF Element Req. Std. Exp. Mixed Passenger ≤ 130 (V ≤ 140) (2 2 ≤ 130 for freight Cant Deficiency I [mm] I = 3.8V ≤ 100 ≤ 153 (V > 140(1) R ≤ 153 for pas.(1 ≤ 160 (special trains) Cant Excess E [mm] - ≤ 110 - -
Comments: 1) And V ≤ 250km/h. 2) Valid for rolling stock complying with the TSI regarding freight trains. 3) Valid for rolling stock complying with the TSI regarding locomotive and passenger trains.
3.2.1.4 Transition Curves Main function of transition curve is to allow gradual change in lateral acceleration between two curves or between curve and straight track.
In most cases transition curves are designed as clothoids with a constant superelevation ramp used for changing the cant in order to obtain constant change in lateral acceleration. However, when the transition curve is short and a rate of change of cant abruptly terminates at its end, some discomfort may occur. In this case, transition curve should be preferably design as a forth degree
16 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS parabola with s-shaped superelevation connecting ramp. Values of rate of change of cant equal zero in both ends and reach maximum at the centre, where they are twice as high as in a clothoids of the same length [11]. The most of transition curves are designed as clothoids, while the fourth degree parabolas are only used in special circumstances (short transition curves).
According to standard Rail Net Denmark regulations, transition curves must be designed as clothoids and are to be used in main tracks and through train routs [11]. Furthermore, the minimum transition curve length shall not be smaller than 20 meters.
There are three criteria imitating the permitted speed in transition curves. Calculations are made based on an assumption that the transition curve is designed in a form of clothoid with coincident linear super elevation ramp. Formulas representing criteria are presented below, where L is a length of the transition curve in meters, and V is the running speed in km/h.
• Rate of change of cant deficiency as a function of time dI h mm i ∆I[mm] × V[km/h] = (3.4) dt s 3.6L[m]
Indicates how the lateral acceleration changes within the time unit and is used specifically to serve passengers’ comfort. ∆I in the equation states the difference in cant deficiency between the transition curve connection points.
• Rate of change of cant as a function of length dh h mm i ∆h[mm] = (3.5) dl m L[m]
Indicates the gradient of the super elevation ramp. ∆h in the equation states the change in cant between the transition curve connection points.
• Rate of change of cant as a function of time dh h mm i ∆h[mm] × V[km/h] = (3.6) dt s 3.6L[m]
Indicates how cant changes within the time unit. ∆h in the equation states the change in cant between the transition curve’s connection points.
Requirements for three mentioned criteria according to TSI and RND are mentioned in table 3.4.
17 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
Table 3.4: Track engineering rules for transition curves design [11][22] Rail Net Denmark TSI INF Element Req. Std. Exp. Design dI Rate of change of cant deficiency as a function of time, dt [mm/s] V ≤ 200 - ≤ 55 ≤ 90 - 200 < V ≤ 250 - ≤ 50 ≤ 75 - dh Rate of change of cant as a function of time, dt [mm/s] V ≤ 200 ≤ 35 ≤ 50 ≤ 70 - 200 < V ≤ 250 ≤ 35 ≤ 50 ≤ 60 - dh Rate of change of cant as a function of length, dL [mm/s] All speeds - ≤ 2.00 ≤ 2.50 -
3.2.1.5 Straight Track Section Between Curves In case when two adjacent curves cannot be connected with single transition curve, two separate transition curves with straight track section between should be inserted for comfort reasons. Straight section shall be also used for safety when two abutting curves with small radii point opposite directions.
Same regulations apply to the straight section between the curves and to the length of elements, and can be found in table 3.1 in section 3.2.1.1.
3.2.1.6 Crossovers A crossover means a switches and crossing connection which allows to change the track to the other track running parallel. Crossover shall be placed in straight track sections if possible, in order to avoid bending standard components that generates additional costs during purchasing and maintenance phases. In case when it is not possible, the radius of the curve where turnout is located should be large with maximum speed of 200km/h [11]. Due to relatively poor track geometry, cant and cant deficiency values are kept lower than in regular curves. List of regulations concerning turnouts placed in curves can be found in table 3.5.
Switches and crossing located in curves can be either contra flexure curved (turnouts bent in opposite directions) or inside curved (turnouts bent the same direction).
Radius of the diverted branch Ru can be calculated from formula:
1 Ru = (3.7) 1 ± 1 Rb Rm
Where: Rb - main line radius Rm – original radius of the branch
18 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
Table 3.5: Track engineering rules for crossovers [11][22] Rail Net Denmark TSI Element Req. Std. Exp. Design Length of straight track in crossover (1 V ≤ 70km/h Lt > 0.20V Lt > 0.10V - - 70 < V ≤ 100km/h Lt > 0.25V Lt > 0.15V - - 110 < V ≤ 200km/h Lt > 0.30V Lt > 0.20V - - Minimum track center distance [m] 1:9 4.80 4.25 - - 1:14 (2 (2 - - 1:27.5 4.75 (2 - - Cant deficiency V ≤ 200km/h Inside curved S&C - I ≤ 100 I ≤ 150 - S&C with contraflexure curves - I ≤ 100(3 - - Comments: 1) For speed V ≤ 70km/h is also required that the requirements concerning straight track between curves are fulfilled (look table 3.1) 2) No additional requirements compared to the standard regulations for track center distance in the standard BN1-154 3) 80 mm for V > 100km/h
For contra flexure curved turnouts domination is subtracted, and is added for inside curved turnouts.
3.2.2 Vertical Alignment Following sections include engineering requirements for parameters that define the vertical alignment’s design.
3.2.2.1 Gradient Purpose of the gradient is to change the track level. Maximum available adhesion force between the driven wheels and the rails is a factor that limits the gradient’s steepness [18].
Table 3.6 presents the requirements for track gradient according to TSI and RND set of rules. Limitations imposed by TSI concern only newly built lines as changing the gradient in existing ones generates high construction costs. Track sections where rolling stock stands still (stabling yards and at platforms) gradient requirements are more strict. It is caused by the fact that accelerations and breaking on tracks with larger gradient requires much more energy due to adhesion, thus pro- duce more wear on rails and breaks, and generates additional maintenance and operation costs [18].
19 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
Table 3.6: Track engineering rules for gradient design [11][22] Rail Net Denmark TSI INF Element Req. Std. Exp. Design New Lines Gradient p [‰] Stabling tracks ≤ 1.5‰ ≤ 2.5‰ - ≤ 2.5‰ Tracks along platforms ≤ 1.5‰ ≤ 2.5‰ ≤ 10.0‰ ≤ 2.5‰ Other main tracks, ≤ 15.6‰ for l < 3 km ≤ 8.0‰ ≤ 12.5‰ ≤ 35.0‰ relief tracks or sidings ≤ 25.0‰(1 for l < 0.5 km
Comments: 1) Only permitted in locations, where trains are not intended to stop and start normal operation.
The difference between maximum gradient value in Rail Net Denmark and TSI requirements can be explained by the fact that TSI distinguish rules between passenger lines and mixed traffic, while RND considers mixed traffic only. Furthermore, RND allows larger gradient on short line section – gradient of 25.0 ‰ is allowed on track sections up to 0.5 km, while 15.6‰ is allowed on sections up to 3.0 km. TSI allows gradient of 35.0 ‰ on passenger lines, without taking into an account freight traffic.
When considering construction cost, it is better to allow large gradients in order to avoid reshaping existing terrain structure. On the other hand, large gradients produce higher operational costs. Implementing large gradients on railway line sections should be preceded with detailed analysis of speed, train length and breaking conditions for all kinds of rolling stock moving on the line.
3.2.2.2 Vertical Curves
When gradient is implemented on the track, the vertical transition curves have to be used in order to ensure safety and comfort.
Danish rules states that transition curves with minimum length of 20 meters have to be used when the change in vertical alignment is greater than 1‰. Otherwise vertical curve can be omitted and track can be constructed as direct breaks or straight line elements [11].
Requirements in connection with allowed vertical radius are listed in table 3.7. Rail Net Denmark associates maximum radius with line speed and is much stricter than TSI. Considered in the project speed of 250 km/h requires large vertical radii, equal or greater than 20,000 meters for standard values. TSI however distinguish the difference between crest and hollow curves, with higher requirements for hollow ones, which shall be greater or equal to 900 meters. The large difference between Danish and European regulations can be caused by the fact that Denmark terrain curvature is rather plane compared to some other European countries, thus there is no need to design small radii for vertical curves.
20 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
Table 3.7: Track engineering rules for vertical curves design [11][22] Rail Net Denmark TSI INF(1 Element Req. Std. Exp. Crest Hollows Vertical Radius RL [m] ≥ 1.0V2 ≥ 0.35V2 ≥ 0.25V2 V ≤ 200 ≥ 10, 000 ≥ 500 ≥ 900 ≥ 5, 000(2 ≥ 2, 000 ≤ 40, 000 ≥ 0.35V2 ≥ 0.175V2 200 < V ≤ 250 ≤ 40, 000 ≥ 20, 000 ≥ 10, 000
Comments: 1) Without considering line speed. 2) ≥ 2, 000 for existing track.
3.3 Ballast Profile
Following section describes the Danish rules concerning ballast profile. The TSI INF do not specify any requirements for the ballast profile, thus references to European specifications are not made. Requirements for the design of ballast profile are described in the Danish Railway Norm BN1-6-6. Standard regulations deviate between different types of the projects - either new line construction, renewal, or upgrade. Exceptional regulations can be only applied for track renewal and upgrading projects. The section consist of overall description of the ballast profile components.
3.3.1 Ballast Profile Components Ballasted track, also knows as "classical track" or "conventional track" is the most commonly used railway structure nowadays. It ensures good drainage, good elasticity, relatively low construction cost and, as it has been used for many years, proven technology [18]. The main role of the ballast superstructure is to absorb and distribute forces from the rolling stock and retain the track location.
The classical railway track consist of framework made from rails and sleepers which are connected and supported on ballast. Rails are fixed to sleepers with fastenings. Superstructure consist of ballast (composed by ballast stones), sub-ballast layer (composed by compressed gravel) and track bed. The formation has to be sufficiently strong and stable, and provides good drainage of rain and melted snow. The cross section of ballast profile can be seen in figure 3.8.
It can be noticed that the ballast and sub ballast are constructed with an inclination xp that ensure drainage of the track. Bt and Ut represent the thickness of the ballast and sub ballast. The thickness is greater for higher speed due to increased dynamic loads. In order to avoid the lateral track displacement in curves, the cross section’s characteristics as width of the ballast shoulder Bsk, track bench Pb b, and the slope a shall be constructed with specific values, as larger widths and smaller slopes effect larger lateral resistance.
21 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
Figure 3.2: Classical cross section of ballast profile [38]
The standard regulations for track renewal and upgrading concerning cross section are summarized in table 3.8. The parameters depend on the speed on the main track.
Table 3.8: Requirements for cross profiles for major rebuilds, upgrades and new installations [3] Element Sidings Main tracks V ≤ 160km/h 160 < V ≤ 200km/h 200 < V ≤ 250km/h Ballast shoulder 0.30 0.40 0.55 (1 0.50 (Bsk) [m] Slope (a) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Ballast thickness 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.35 (Bt ) [m] Sub ballast thickness 0.10 0.15 0.25 0.30 (Ut ) [m] Track bed width (3 (3 (2 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.80 (Pb) [m] Inclination of track bed 40 40 40 40 (Xp)[‰] Comments: 1) Value for wooden sleepers; can be relaxed to 0.40 m if concrete sleepers are used. 2) Value relevant for cant 0 mm. If cant if 5 - 80 mm the Pb shall be raised by 0.15 m on the outside of the curve. If cant is 85 - 160 mm the Pb shall be raised by 0.30 m on the outside of the curve. 3) If existing Pb value is 2.70 - 3.00, the existing value do not has to be changed.
22 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
3.3.2 Track Center Distance Following section describes regulations for track center distances and fouling points as stated in Rail Net Denmark norm BN1-154-2. TSI also describes recommendation for track center distance which will be used for comparison, however, there are no specifications describing fouling points.
Recommendations for track center distance prevent a collision between two trains moving on the parallel tracks. The distance is established taking into an account high speed aerodynamics, but also additional equipment located around the track, as for instance signals and signs. On straight tracks, the distance f0 is measured perpendicularly between two parallel tracks, as shown in figure 3.9. If one or both tracks are curved the additional supplement e, which value depends on the radii, has to be added.
Figure 3.3: Different measurements of track center distances with consideration of tracks’ geometry [5]
The track center distance vary between different project types (renewal, upgrade and new line construction), and different speeds (the larger the speed, the greater distance has to be kept). Table 3.9 shows the minimum values for track center distance.
Table 3.9: Minimum values for track center distance [5][22] V ≤ 120km/h V ≤ 160km/h 160 < V ≤ 200km/h 200 < V ≤ 250km/h Standard regulations 4250 4250 4250 4500 At design [mm] Exceptional regulations 4250 4100 4250 4500 At design[mm] Minimum in service 4150 4000 4150 4400 [mm] TSI INF [mm] - - 3800 4000
The distance for tracks placed at the station shall be at least 4750 mm according to the standard regulations. Moreover, for horizontal curves with radius smaller than 1,500 m additional buffer shall be added to the minimum values for track center distance. The additional value is as same as additional value for the structure gauge, presented in table 3.10.
23 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
TSI bases the measurements for track center distance on the category of the traffic, where the nominal minimum track center distance is 3800mm [22].
3.3.2.1 Fouling Points Fouling point defines the point at the crossing or turnout where a vehicle travelling on one track may obstruct the structural gauge of the other track. It can be seen in figure 3.4 that the fouling point is given by the minimum track separation f0 and, in case of the curved track, a curvature correction e.
Figure 3.4: Fouling point placement in accordance to the track geometry [5]
3.4 Structure Gauge
Following section describes the requirements for structure gauge valid for electrified lines in Denmark, as stated in Rail Net Denmark standard "Fritrumsprofiler", as well as brief presentation of the TSI requirements for the structure loads.
3.4.1 Structure Gauge in Denmark Structure gauge defines the profile which borders cannot be violated by any external elements of the track, such as bridges, signals, platforms etc. The structure gauge is appointed according to the kinematic characteristics of the wagon during the movement, in a way that prevents conflicts with outer objects. For curves, either horizontal or vertical, the sizes within the structural gauge shall be increased according to the values presented in table 3.10, due to the additional train movements, as illustrated in figure 3.5. Reference for structure gauge is level through top of rails SO.
Furthermore, the structure gauge depends on line electrification. The track section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden will be electrified, thus structure gauge for non-electrified track can be omitted. When the speed is greater than 200 km/h the structure gauge applies for lines with new bridges and similar structures on lines electrified before 2012, and new and planned electrification with new bridges and similar constructions. The values describing profile for speed range 200 - 250
24 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
Figure 3.5: Difference between structure gauge for the train moving on straight track and in the curve [16]
Table 3.10: Supplement for structure gauge in horizontal and vertical curves 3.5 Lateral Vartical Horizontal radius Additional value Vertical Radius Additional value(1 1499 - 500 m 5 mm 9999 - 7000 m 5 mm 499 - 300 m 10 mm 6999 - 5000 m 10 mm 299 - 250 m 15 mm 4999 - 3000 m 15 mm 249 - 240 m 25 mm 2999 - 2500 m 20 mm 239 - 230 m 35 mm 2499 - 2000 m 25 mm 229 - 220 m 50 mm 219 - 210 m 60 mm 1). Relevant for h <1170 and h >3300 mm 209 - 200 m 75 mm 199 - 190 m 90 mm km/h can be seen in figure 3.6. The EA structure gauge is used at the open lines, while the EBa profile is used for lines with constructions and bridges.
The structure gauge for line speed in a range of 160 km/h - 200 km/h differs from the one for 250 km/h for vertical parameters. EA profile for 200 km/h is 7120 mm, while EBa profile is 5780 mm above the top of the rail [16].
In order to ensure interoperability within Europe, the structure gauges have to be compati- ble. However, international regulations do not focus specifically on structure gauges but rather on loading gauges, which define the largest possible cross section that can be loaded on wagon [12].
The size of the gauge is limited in width by fixed objects and also by the track center-line distance, and in height by overhead contact wire in electrified lines. In Europe the width of the gauge profile is 3.15 m, and the nominal contact wire height is generally 5.3 m or higher above top of the rail. Fehmarn Belt fixed link is planned for loading gauge C (3.60 m x 4.83 m), as shown in figure 3.7.
25 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
Figure 3.6: Difference between structure gauge for the train moving on straight track and in the curve [16]
Figure 3.7: Nominal overhead contact wire height, loading gauges and intermodal gauges in the German- Scandinavian corridor [12]
The TSI regulations refer to the norm EN 15273-3:2013 for specific measurements of international loading gauges. However, TSI specifies loading gauge G1 (3.15 m x 4.28 m) as generally cleared in Europe, while the gauge GC (3.15 m x 4.65 m) or larger is required on new core or other TEN-T lines [22][12].
26 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
3.5 Platforms
International regulations for platforms are described in TSI PRM "Accessibility for Persons with Reduced Mobility", while Rail Net Denmark’s standards are included in two documents:
• Standard BN1-9-2: Danger areas and freeways on platforms
• Standard BN1-49-1: Mutual placement of tracks and platforms
The following section describes requirements based on danish standards.
Measurements describing the platform are its height and offset. Both parameters can be seen in figure 3.8. The height of the platform is measured from the top of rails, while the offset is defined as a distance from the top of rails measured from "running edge" of nearest rail to the edge of the platform [39]. Nominal values of height and offset depend on the track geometry: straight or curved. Platform height and offset will change if the platform is located at the curved track with applied cant, and have to be calculated individually for every different case.
Figure 3.8: Parameters describing the placement of the platform along track [39]
Nominal values for height of the platform differ between existing and new platforms, as well as for platforms during track renewal. The nominal height for platforms on main lines (except S-bane) are as follows [39]:
• Existing platforms: 26 cm, 35 cm, 50 cm, 55 cm, 68 cm, 72 cm, 76 cm
• New platforms: 55 cm
• Platform during track renewal: 26 cm or 55 cm (if this is technical/economical properly considering the local conditions)
27 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
The values for nominal offset of platform depends on platform’s height and the radius of the horizontal curve. Table 3.11 presents the nominal offset as a relationship between two decisive parameters.
Table 3.11: Nominal offset of platforms [39] Platform Horizontal curve raidus [m] height [mm] Straight 1999 599 499 399 349 299 ≥ 2000 track -600 -500 -400 -350 -300 -250 350 845 845 850 850 855 855 855 860 351 - 650 945 945 955 965 980 995 1005 1020 651 - 840 950 955 955 965 980 995 1005 1020 841 - 930 950 960 965 965 980 995 1005 1020 931 - 1250 (1 1025 1025 1030 1030 1035 1035 1035 1040 Comments: 1) Platform height only allowed on sidings (except S-bane sidings)
Tolerances for offset and height of the platform depend on their values and on the situation (new platform, renewal of edge of platforms, track renewal, tamping of track). Tolerances applying for new platforms offset are withing the range of 0/+20 mm, while the height tolerances are withing the range of -10/+20 mm. The same tolerances apply for renewal of the platform’s edge.
TSI regulations requires the nominal height of the platform to be either 550 mm or 760 mm. The value of the offset is determined in a way that allows service of the G1 profile (3.15 m x 4.28 m), with maximum 50 mm tolerance [22].
3.5.1 Platforms: Width and Length In general platform is divided into two zones: danger area, where passengers can only be present while train is stationary at the platform, and a freeways where passengers can be present the whole time. The location of the two zones can be seen in figure 3.9. Width of the platform depends on the speed on the main line, platform type and cross section of platform. Standard regulations for the width of the danger areas bsik and freeways boph for new platforms, renewal of the platforms, upgrading, and new object on platforms can be seen in table 3.12. If there are objects on the platform, with the length up to 1 m, the width of the freeway can be reduced to 1.6 m. For new platforms the additional requirements taking into an account the expected number of passengers have to be applied.
There are no specific requirements considering the length of the existing platforms. The length on the mainline (except S-bane) are typically within the range of 160 - 320 m, but the value differs from line to line. Length of the new platform is also not specified directly by Rail Net Denmark. Typically, the decision is made by the Railway Inspectorate during the initial analysis of the project [39]. In general the platform shall be long enough to accommodate the longest train
28 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
Figure 3.9: Location of danger areas and freeways on platform’s islands [39]
Table 3.12: Minimum width of danger zones bsik and freeways boph [39] Zone and max speed [km/h] Width [m] Danger area 0.85 V ≤ 160 Danger area 1.35 160 < V ≤ 200 Freeway 2.00 (1 V ≤ 200 Comments: 1) If length of the object < 1 m then boph = 1.60 m that will stop at this platform.
TSI associates the length of the platform with the line category. For speed between 120 km/h and 200 km/h the minimum length of the platform shall be withing the range of 200-400 meters.
29 CHAPTER 3. NORMS AND REGULATIONS
3.6 Summary of the Norms
The project considers the speed upgrade to 250 km/h on the whole track section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden, however it is very likely that at some track sections it will be impossible and the speed will be reduced (ex. platforms). As mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, danish requirements will be use as a base for the upgrade project.
Following regulations will have to be applied for 250 km/h upgrade project:
• Track geometry Track alignment proposed for line speed of 250 km/h will have to comply with the number of standards concerning track geometry. Upgrade project should comply with standard or (preferably) requested regulations, while exceptional set of rules should be avoided.
• Ballast profile Upgrading the track from line speed of 200 km/h to 250 km/h requires increase in ballast parameters as: ballast thickens, sub ballast thickness and track bed width.
• Track center distance Track center distance for line speed 250 km/h is 0.25 m wider than for 200 km/h. It has to be investigated if the upgrade project requires increasing the track center distance.
• Structure gauge Structure gauge for line speed 250 km/h is higher than for 200 km/h. That means that some objects may need to be raised, as for instance bridges or overhead contact wires.
• Platforms Platform at Nykøbing F. has to be investigated for fulfilling requirements for higher speed at the main track. Station in Holeby will be analyzed considering regulations for new platforms.
Findings presented in the previous sections will be used further, in optimization model and track alignment design.
30 4 Mathematical Model for Alignment Optimization
As track alignment is one of the inputs for the software that will be used for capacity analysis, the particular track geometry solutions for line speed of 250 km/h have to be established. The norm foundation presented in chapter 3 will be used as a reference for conducting the upgrade of the infrastructure.
The chapter presents the initial stage of the upgrade of the existing track in order to adjust it to the increased line speed, with accordance to the engineering rules concerning horizontal alignment presented in section 3.2.1. Parameters for track geometry solution as optimal cant size for desired speed will be found by using mathematical model. The following sections present model’s description, objective and constraints as well as development’s specifications. Also, the potential for future development of the model will be briefly discussed.
Mathematical model used in this thesis was first developed by Rie Jensen and Mai-Britt Rasmussen in June 2015, for their Master thesis "Upgrade of Regional Railway Lines - An investigation of integrating Lille Syd in the TEN corridor".
4.1 Objective
When upgrading a railway track the number of engineering rules regarding track geometrical requirements must be met. They are usually the first parameter that is taken into an account when speed upgrades on a railway line are considered.
Nowadays, the first step in the investigation of possible speed upgrades on railway line is to analyze existing track’s curvature in order to check possibility to increase the speed without making changes in the geometry but also without violating the track requirements. If it is not possible, the different cant sizes are checked in order to investigate speed upgrade potential. The procedure is carried out manually but also, due to the large number of requirements, can be rather time consuming. The most problematic cases are areas with shared transition curves, where changing one cant size will influence the adjacent curve. Thus it is difficult to obtain the optimal solution, especially on the tracks with complex geometry.
31 CHAPTER 4. MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR ALIGNMENT OPTIMIZATION
4.2 Model Framework
Model proposed in this chapter was built based on Danish TER and can be solved for all sets of regulations, herein requested, standard and exceptional regulations. It optimizes the cant size in each curve in order to obtain the highest possible speed with respect to the curve length.
The details of the model are shown is Appendix B while this section describes model framework.
4.2.1 Model Input There are four sets included in the model, which are: curves, possible speeds, possible cant sizes and penalties for using exceptional regulations. A curve dataset contains information about each curve as radius, length and cant. Possible speeds vary from 0 km/h to 250 km/h and are given as a multiplication of 10. Range for possible cant sizes varies from 0 to 160 mm and values are represented as a multiplication of 5, with an exception in the interval 0 - 20 mm, as these are usually set to either 0 or 20 mm.
The purpose of using penalties is to minimize the use of exceptional regulations. They are evaluated basing on findings in chapter 3 and correspond to every of eight constraints stated in TER that apply to cant size. Parameter that generates the highest penalty is cant deficiency, as violating cant size is not associated with penalty. Remaining constrains are associated with the same penalties’ weights, thus they are assessed to have the same significance in the project. Hence, penalty for all constrains equals 1, except the cant deficiency for which the penalty is doubled and equals 2. That can be seen in table 4.1. Constrains for transition curves (TC) are associated with two index numbers - one that applies to the TC before curve and one that applies to the TC after curve. In a more complex study on the model a sensitivity analysis could be conducted in order to see how weight of the particular penalty influence the result.
Table 4.1: Weight of penalties assigned to particular constrain in order to minimize the use of exceptional regulations by model Constrain Index Penalty Cant deficiency >100 mm 1 2 Length <0,25V m 2 1 dI dt >55 mm/s 3,4 1 dh dt >50 mm/s 5,6 1 dh dl >2 mm/s 7,8 1
32 CHAPTER 4. MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR ALIGNMENT OPTIMIZATION
The model consist of three binary decision variables:
1, if curve c ∈ C applies cant size k ∈ K and speed s ∈ S x = (4.1) cks 0, Otherwise
1 if curve c ∈ C applies cant size k ∈ K and speed s ∈ S and curve yckpsq = c + 1 ∈ C applies cant size p ∈ K and speed q ∈ S (4.2) 0 Otherwise 1, if curve c ∈ C applies exceptional regulations i z = (4.3) ci 0, Otherwise
The y variables are used to capture constrains for transition curves while x variables captures all additional constraints. It is necessary to distinguish these two variables in order to determine the values of ∆h and ∆I that represent differences in cant sizes and cant deficiency in case when two adjacent curves share one transition curve. Other constraints concern an individual curve and can be determined without taking adjacent curves conditions into consideration. Variable xcks equals one when curve c uses cant size k and allows speed s. In the manner, variable yckpsq equals one when curve c uses cant size k and allows speed s and curve c + 1 uses cant size p and allows speed q. When these conditions are not fulfilled, then variables equal 0. The z variable controls if the curve violates any of the regulations stated in table 4.1. It is set to 1 if regulations for curve c are violated, and 0 otherwise.
Required input data for each of the curves can be seen in table 4.2. It includes information about curve itself (as radius and length), and transition curves data. Also location of the platforms and turnouts (together with their type) in the curve, as well as set of regulations that will be applied in curve are stated as a binary variables. If standard regulations’ variable equals one then this set of regulations will be used for particular curve. If both standard and requested regulations’ variable equals zero then exceptional set of regulations will be applied for the curve.
From the input data values stated in section 3.2.1 of norm foundation are generated. The model computes values for every possible combination of cants and speeds for each curve, thus the large memory capacity is required, as well as long computation time. These factors could be limited by decreasing the number of possible speeds or by dividing set of curves into smaller sets.
33 CHAPTER 4. MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR ALIGNMENT OPTIMIZATION
Table 4.2: Required input data for each curve Input Data Unit Curve radius Meters Curve length Meters Length of 1st transition curve Meters Length of 2nd transition curve Meters Start stationing for 1st transition curve Meters Start stationing for 2nd transition curve Meters Platform Binary Turnout Binary Contra flexure turnout type Binary Apply requested regulations Binary Apply standard regulations Binary
4.2.2 Objective Function Objective function maximizes the sum of speeds for each curve and minimizes the number of exceptional regulations used. Both parameters are multiplied by the curve length in order to prioritize long curves. Objective function can be seen in 4.4 below: Õ Õ Õ Õ Õ Maximize xcks sLc − wi zci Lc (4.4) c∈C k ∈K s∈S c∈C i∈E Where: C - set of curves, K - set of cant sizes, S - set of speeds, s - speed, Lc - curve length wi - applied penalties E - set of exceptions.
Variable xcks can be set to one only when the combination of cant and speed in curve returns the highest possible speed while other combinations are excluded from the model. Likewise, zci is set to one only in case when curve c uses exceptional regulations i.
4.2.3 Constraints The model constraints reflect the regulations stated in TER. The binary variable that indicates the set of regulations used is integrated in the constraint. When it equals one, then either standard or requested regulations are used, depending on input data. When binary variable is set to zero for both standard and requested regulations then set of exceptional regulations is used in the model. Following indicators are used:
• nc - standard set of regulations
34 CHAPTER 4. MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR ALIGNMENT OPTIMIZATION
• oc - requested set of regulations 4.5 and 4.6 show two examples of how constraints are included in mathematical model. The constraint controls cant size at the platforms, either for standard or exceptional regulations. If nc = 1 then standard regulations apply in the curve, that is maximum cant of 60mm. Likewise, if plc = 1 then platform is located along the track in the curve. In case when nc = 0 and plc = 1 then exceptional regulations apply in this curve and the cant cannot be greater than 110mm. If either nc or plc equal 0 then the constraint becomes ineffective. The binary variable oc for requested regulations cannot be used in this case as requested cant size for platform located in the curve is not stated in danish track engineering rules. Õ Õ nc plc kxcks ≤ 60 c ∈ C (4.5) k ∈K s∈S ∀ Õ Õ plc kxcks ≤ 110 c ∈ C (4.6) k ∈K s∈S ∀ Some of the requirements stated in TER (track engineering rules) are presented in the form that make it difficult to transform them into their mathematical representation, as they are given as an exact numeric value. This is the case for cant size and cant deficiency, where the mathematical formula from TER is replaced with upper bound value. Thus 4.7 is replaced with 4.8 and upper bound for cant size is set as less or equal 115mm.
8V2 h = (4.7) requested,TER R
hrequested,model ≤ 115 (4.8) TER requirement for cant deficiency 4.9 expressed as "equal to" becomes "less or equal to". In case of large radii the cant deficiency value will move towards 0, thus +1 is added to the constraint 4.10 used in the model.
3.8V2 h = (4.9) requested,TER R
3.8V2 h ≤ + 1 (4.10) requested,model R The model’s integrity constraints that control variables x and y can be seen below. Constraint 4.11 controls the condition that sum of all x variables equals 1, which ensures that for each curve exactly one cant size and one speed are chosen. Conditions for y variables are stated in 4.12 and 4.13 and are set in accordance to the x variables. Õ Õ xcks = 1 c ∈ C (4.11) k ∈K s∈S ∀
yckpsq ≥ xcks + xc+1,pq − 1 c ∈ C, k ∈ K, p ∈ K, s ∈ S, q ∈ S ∀ ∀ ∀ ∀ ∀ (4.12) Forces yckpsq = 1 when xcks = 1 and xc+1,pq = 1
35 CHAPTER 4. MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR ALIGNMENT OPTIMIZATION
2yckpsq ≤ xcks + xc+1,pq c ∈ C, k ∈ K, p ∈ K, s ∈ S, q ∈ S ∀ ∀ ∀ ∀ ∀ (4.13) Forces yckpsq = 0 if either xcks = 0 or xc+1,pq = 0
Constraints are also used to set the condition for changing cant size only in case when the curve is connected to the transition curve. Otherwise, the cant size is set to 0 when the curve is connected to the straight track, or the cant size of adjacent curve is chosen.
4.2.4 Implementation of the Model The code for mathematical model was implemented and solved by using IBM ILOG CPLEX Optimization Studio which is an analytic tool for solving optimization problems. The code script used to solve the model was first built by Jesper Thorsen, a former master student at DTU, for the purpose of solving the model for Rie Jensen and Mai-Britt Rasmussen thesis. The script was modified in order to be compatible with the newest regulations and with requirements for line speed of 250 km/h.
The script for generating alignment solutions can be seen in Appendix C.
4.3 Summary
The model presented in this chapter can be used only for evaluation of the curves while other sections have to be considered separately. Nowadays, the usual process for adjusting the track alignment follows the steps:
1. Change in cant size
2. Prolongation of transition curves
3. Increase of curve radii
The model only solves the first step from above, however it has a great potential for future development. It can be further expanded by incorporating straight track elements, by allowing prolongation of transition curves or changes in curves radii.
The model was used to find the optimal cant sizes for line speed 250 km/h with a Rail Net Denmark standard set of regulations used as a reference. Furthermore, the elements of the alignment at which speed is significantly lower than desired speed will be identified and the further analysis will be conducted.
36 5 Track Geometry Solution
Based on previous chapters, the track geometry for speed upgrade up to 250 km/h will be analyzed in following sections. The optimization model is used to determine the optimal cant for each curve, and then additional adjustment are made in order to obtain the line speed as close to desired speed as possible. The new geometry was made based on two principals - minimal changes in track alignment and minimum use of exceptional regulations.
5.1 General Considerations about Speed Upgrade
Speed upgrade project on Fehmarn Belt fixed link is currently under construction on track sections located in Zealand. The project consist of 2 different phases and includes [10]:
• Building a double tracks Vordingborg - Rødby;
• Speed upgrade up to 200 km/h at Ringsted - Rødby section;
• New station 5 km inland from Rødby;
• 1,000 meter long passing track for freight trains;
• New single track bridge across Guldborg Sund;
• Electrification from Ringsted to Rødby;
• Implementation of ERTMS baseline 3 level 2 from Ringsted to Rødby.
Phase 1, that includes upgrading railway and infrastructure has started in 2016 and is about to be finished in 2021 on track section from Ringsted to Nykøbing Falster. Electrification of this section, that is also the part of phase 1 will be completed before 2024.
Phase 2 that consist of work on track section on Lolland (Nykøbing F - tunnel) are postponed and will be coordinated with opening of the Fehmarn Belt tunnel [10].
As mentioned in Chapter 2, other alternatives for speed upgrade were considered, including the possibility of line speed of 250 km/h. Proposition of solution for track geometry for 250 km/h speed is described in this chapter, using 200 km/h plans as a base line.
When speed upgrade is considered, it is important to investigate the length of the line that can be upgraded to higher speed. What is more, breaking and acceleration characteristics for the trains that are going to be used on line are relevant for upgrade and future smooth line operation. Short length of upgraded sections cannot be always utilized as track is too short to obtain line speed by train. Speed profiles with braking/acceleration characteristics taken into an account for line speeds of 200 km/h and 250 km/h will be presented in chapter 7 - Capacity Calculations.
37 CHAPTER 5. TRACK GEOMETRY SOLUTION
In most cases the greatest challenge in upgrade projects is to change existing infrastructure in a way that it sill complies with the national regulations. Requested regulations shall be always first to use in order to minimize wear and passengers’ discomfort. However, as requested regulations are very strict and require big track adjustments, the standard regulations are usually applied to decrease the construction cost. Use of exceptional regulations shall be limited to cases where it is necessary to use them, and have to be always well justified.
5.2 Strategy for Speed Profile Upgrade
Presented solution is considered to be the optimal one from the author’s point of view. However, different assumptions and greater experience may lead to better solution for track alignment design. During the upgrade process, different actions were considered to adjust the geometry. The options, presented below, are prioritized according to the complexity level, which also reflects the cost of its execution. The actions are:
1. Optimization of cant size
2. Adjustments of lengths of transition curves
3. Adjustments of curve radii
Changing the cant size will also change the vertical location of rails. Change like this is considered as a track adjustment and is performed by using temper machine. Also changes in the length of transition curves are considered as a track adjustments and can be executed in accordance to the change of cant size.
In curves where adjustment of cant size and length of transition curves do not lead to increased line speed, it is necessary to displace the track in order to minimize the use of the exceptional regulations. The actual displacement depends on curve’s radius and lengths of transition curves.
The track displacements and adjustments are especially complicated at the stations and urban areas, where tracks are already integrated in the existing urban architecture. In cases like these, the use of exceptional regulations may be needed. However, the exceptional rules are only allowed in situations where it is too expensive to optimize the geometry, rebuilt is impossible, or tracks go through protected areas.
38 CHAPTER 5. TRACK GEOMETRY SOLUTION
5.3 The Existing Track Geometry
Track geometry used as a base line is to be built in few years, thus materials and plans for track alignment adjusted to the speed of 200 km/h obtained from Banedanmark are used as a reference. Nowadays the track section Nykøbing F. - Rødby consist of single track. The line will be expended to double track, which will lead to slight differences between right and left track alignments.
5.4 Upgrading Existing Track to 250 km/h
The final track geometry was found by going through the number of different steps, which were: • Model runs: Rail Net Denmark’s standard regulations used to optimize the cant size to the objective speed of 250 km/h • Identification of elements that do not fulfill the objective speed of 250 km/h • Manual adjustments in infrastructure in order to reach the desired speed profile, conducted according to the prioritized actions mentioned in section 5.2 • Implementing changes in the design software (MicroStation) in order to check solution’s feasibility During the upgrade process mathematical model was run three times, for each set of regulations (requested, standard and exceptional). However, output from running model for standard regula- tions was used as a based for further manual changes. The model’s output from using other sets of regulations were used as an overview for further modifications.
In general it was possible to obtain speed of 250 km/h on the track section located at Lolland. Station in Nykøbing Falster and the bridge across Guldborg Sund, placed right after the station made it impossible to upgrade speed significantly without displacing the track. Track displacement in this area would lead to rebuilding the whole Nykøbing F. station, Guldborg Sund bridge and urban area between them. These changes are considered to be very costly thus this track section is adjusted to the higher speed by modification of cant sizes, and by using exceptional regulations. The more detailed description of the speed profile for base line and for 250 km/h alternative can be seen in chapter 7.
Differences in track geometry between left and right track cause the differences in set of regulations applied. For the base line, the left track will be newly built along the existing track. The single track that is currently use for bidirectional operation in Lolland will be adjusted for higher speed and used as a right track when the project is done. The geometry of left track is more complex and consist of more elements at the section around Nykøbing station and Guldbergsund bridge. The detailed list of track elements can be seen in Appendix D.
Table 5.1 shows the number of exceptional regulations used in order to obtain the highest possible speed.
39 CHAPTER 5. TRACK GEOMETRY SOLUTION
Table 5.1: Total number of exceptional regulations used for upgraded line speed (250 km/h) Right track Left track Cant 0 0 Transition curves 0 5 Cant deficiency 0 0 Element lengths 1 1 Total number of exceptional regulations used 1 5
There is only one exceptional regulation used for right track, which concerns the length of the elements. Upgrading the speed on the left track requires using more exceptional regulations not only for the element’s length, but also for transition curves. Exceptional regulations applied in the project are used in order to create smooth speed profile and avoid high construction cost. Moreover, acceleration/braking curves and lengths of the elements were taken into an account while finding an optimal solution for track geometry.
Curve at Lolland can be used as an example (stationing 222+935 - 224+248, left track). Adjust- ments in track section at Lolland allowed to obtain the speed of 250 km/h at the whole track section placed on the island, except the one curve where the speed would have to be decreased to 230 km/h if the standard set of regulations would apply. It would be possible to use standard regulations and obtain the speed of 250 km/h by increasing the length of the second transition curve by 40 meters, however there is a crossover placed on the straight track element coming after the curve. Due to the crossover placement and braking/acceleration time it was decided to not change the length of the transition curve and use exceptional regulations in order to allow speed 250 km/h.
Decision about rebuilding the Nykøbing Falster station and Guldborg Sund bridge may remove a bottleneck caused by the speed restrictions in that area. It was decided to not include plans for station and bridge rebuilt as the investigation would be very broad and requires technical knowledge in many fields. Area around Nykøbing F. station shall be analyzed for the purpose of the speed increase, as the Fehmarnbelt fixed link, when finished, will cause the increase in capacity utilization on the line and may result in congestion at the station. If the Nykøbing Falster station and the Guldborg Sund bridge were rebuilt in the future, in order to increase the speed on the railway line, the train could run 250 km/h on the rest of the line, as the track geometry would be already prepared for this possibility.
5.4.1 Straightening of the Curves Radii
Track placement at the "critical point" between Nykøbing F. station and Guldborg Sund bridge remains unchanged, due to the complexity and urban environment. However, the track section placed at Lolland is surrounded mostly by farmlands and the speed upgrade up to 250 km/h is implemented by changing the geometry of problematic track elements.
40 CHAPTER 5. TRACK GEOMETRY SOLUTION
In general, radii in 4 curves were changed - in 2 abutting and 2 individual curves. Following changes were implemented:
1. Radius and length of the curve before the Holeby station were increased. That result in displacement of the track by around 1.9 m. Position of transition curves changed due to the curve prolongation. Furthermore, due to the displacement of the transition curve, the switches and crossing have to be move by approximately 30 m towards Nykøbing F. station (Displacement presented in Appendix K drawing TPL-01).
2. Increase in curve radius and length of transition curves, causing the track displacement of approximately 0.8 m in the widest point (Appendix K drawing TPL-02).
3. The abutting curves required increasing the length of one of the curves and increasing the radii in both curves. Change in radii and length caused the track displacement of around 0.5 m (in the widest point) (Appendix K drawing TPL-03).
Changing the radii of curves allows to obtain the line speed of 250 km/h without using any excep- tional regulations. All changes and calculations concerning track geometry can be investigated more thoroughly in Appendix D.
5.4.2 Track Adjustments around Fehmarn Belt Tunnel Curves located before the Fehmarnbelt tunnel portal cannot be investigated in details by using CAD based software due to the lack of required track plans. Calculations have shown that it is necessary to increase the length of the transition curves in order to allow line speed of 250 km/h. Change in transition curves length will result in track displacement that is calculated by using the formula for 3rd degree parable between straight track and line [11]. Calculations can be seen in Appendix L. Two curves located near Fehmarnbelt tunnel will be displaced by approximately 0.11 m.
5.4.3 Vertical Alignment Vertical alignment is briefly analyzed in the project in order to check if it comply with regulations. It is assumed that displacement of the curves will not change the radius of vertical curves nor gradient.
Gradient on the whole line is lower or equal 12.5‰, which is upper bound for standard regulations. Exceptional regulations for vertical curves design are used at around 6.5 km of the track, which accounts for 11% of the whole line length. Danish regulations for vertical curves radii are very strict, and requested requirements applies for rather short vertical curves. In general it was decided not to modify vertical curves on the track section between Nykøbing F. and Puttgarden.
41 CHAPTER 5. TRACK GEOMETRY SOLUTION
5.5 Summary
The track alignment design proposed for line speed of 250 km/h allows to run trains with the speed of 250 km/h on the 97% of the line section considered in the upgrade project. Further investigation of Nykøbing F. station and Guldborg Sund bridge can be made in order to increase the speed at this area. Exceptional regulations were used for 6 track elements in order to create smooth speed profile that takes into an account acceleration and braking curves. To allow line speed of 250 km/h in Lolland, it was necessary to change the radii in 4 curves, hence the track will be displaced slightly. Other elements in the track alignment were adjusted to higher speed by changing the size of the cant.
Vertical profile complies with standard regulations for gradient on the whole line section. However, exceptional regulations for vertical curve radius are used on the 11% of track length. Even though, it was decided not to modify the vertical alignment of the line.
Track alignment proposed for line speed of 250 km/h will be further used in capacity analysis.
42 6 Capacity Theory
Based on findings from previous chapters, the capacity calculations for Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden line section are carried out. Following chapter presents the method to determine the capacity by using UIC 406 method, developed by International Union of Railways. It is nowadays the valid method for assessing the capacity utilization on European railway network. The procedure described in UIC 406 will be further used by RailSys to calculate the capacity on analyzed railway line.
6.1 The UIC 406 Method
In 2004 the International Union of Railway published the document that presents the method to carry out capacity calculations based on criteria and methodologies common from international point of view. UIC 406 leaflet states that capacity as such does not exist but depends on the way it is utilized. However, capacity on a given infrastructure is based on the dependencies between [33]:
• The number of trains. The more trains in network, the less capacity is available. • The average speed. Higher average speed gives a longer braking distance. • The stability. Time supplements and buffers have to be added to train’s running time and time between trains in order to minimize the possibility of delays. • The heterogeneity. The capacity on a line decreases when there are big differences in running times for trains operating on this line (for instance passengers and freight trains).
UIC 406 defines the relation between these parameters as a "capacity balance", shown in figure 6.1. The place on the axis, where two chords connect, corresponds to the value of particular parameter. Capacity is reflected in a length of the chords, thus increasing the length of the chord is equivalent to increase in capacity. Finally, positions of the chord on the four axes define the capacity utilization. For example, in mixed-traffic working patterns, the heterogeneity is higher which results in lower number of trains and lower stability. Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden line section will operates both high speed and freight trains. The difference in average speed is significant and will have a big influence on accommodating both types of trains in a timetable. The lower number of trains will contribute to the lower stability, as delays will scatter through the network.
Different requirements result in different points of view. UIC 406 leaflet presents how capacity is viewed differently from the position of [33]:
• Market, where the focus is on customer needs, as short travel time and number of train paths.
• Infrastructure planning that considers factors as maintenance strategies and an expected infrastructure conditions.
43 CHAPTER 6. CAPACITY THEORY
Figure 6.1: Capacity balance [33]
• Timetable planning put an interest in time supplements and well-planned connection services in stations.
• Operations, where the main focus is put on delays that occur on line.
The each of the mentioned viewpoints will result in different capacity requirement result. Even though, each of them is correct in terms of their own specific background.
6.1.1 Capacity Consumption Calculation The base for capacity analysis is the pre-constructed timetable for the particular infrastructure. Then the trains paths assigned to the specific line section are compressed and the examination of the left capacity can be carried out. Unused capacity can be either left unused or additional train paths can be added to the timetable. However, it should be noted that it is not always possible to add new paths to the timetable with unused capacity.
The compression method can be only applied for the calculations of a capacity consumption for single line section. in order to assess the capacity utilization for the whole line or route, the calculation of the capacity of every single line section shall be carried out. The route with highest capacity consumption will determine the capacity consumption for the whole line.
The capacity consumption varies between the day, the time of the day, season and so on. The com- pression base should be at least two hours time window over a peak period of one representative day.
During the compression process all single train paths are "squeezed" together to the point where the minimum theoretical headway is obtained, without any buffer time. Compression can be done either by graphical analysis or by analytic calculation. The example of graphical method for compression is presented in figure 6.2. Parameters as timetable running times, given overtakes, crossings and stopping times cannot be changed during the compression process.
Each train path represents the time during which the train occupies the network. The line section is divided into block sections, that size depend on block system, signalling system and safety
44 CHAPTER 6. CAPACITY THEORY
Figure 6.2: Graphical method for compression [33] technologies. The train occupies the block as long as its end passes the safety point behind the block section. The occupation time consist of actual running time of the train with particular characteristics travelling on specific infrastructure. Besides of that, occupation time is expended by percentage of recommended time supplements used for incorporated operations, as time for clearing or reaction time for block’s components. The components included in total block occupation time are illustrated in figure 6.3.
Figure 6.3: Components of the block occupation time [33]
Besides of the block occupation time, other time supplements can be added in order to increase the timetable’s stability. Adding buffer times reduce the transfer of delays from one train to the others.
45 CHAPTER 6. CAPACITY THEORY
Buffer times together with infrastructure occupation time defines the capacity consumption, as seen in figure 6.4
The capacity consumption can be calculated by using following formulas [33]:
Total consumption time
k = A + B + C + D (6.1) Where: k: total consumption time [min] A: infrastructure occupation [min] B: buffer time [min] C: supplement for single-track lines [min] D: supplements for maintenance [min]
Capacity consumption
100 K = k × (6.2) U Where: K: Capacity consumption [%] U: chosen time window [min]
Figure 6.4: Elements incorporated in the capacity consumption [33]
46 CHAPTER 6. CAPACITY THEORY
6.1.2 Congestion Congestion occurs when the infrastructure occupation figure is greater than a typical value or when due to the extensive route shifting the market requirements cannot be longer met. UIC recommendation states that maximum capacity consumption for mixed traffic lines, which are majority in Denmark, is 75% during the peak period. The percentage of maximum capacity consumption vary within the time of the day and type of the line. Heterogeneous traffic increases the possibility of faster trains catching up with slower trains and experiencing secondary delays. Capacity utilization of 100% is not allowed as delays would spread through the whole network. UIC suggestions for maximum capacity consumption are presented in table 6.1.
Table 6.1: Percentage of maximum capacity consumption according to UIC [33] Type of line Peak hour Daily period Comment The possibility to cancel some Dedicated suburban 85% 70% services allows for high levels passenger traffic of capacity utilization Dedicated high-speed 75% 60% line Can be higher when number of Mixed traffic lines 75% 60% trains is low (<5 per hour) with strong heterogeneity
6.1.3 Application The process of evaluating the capacity consumption on the specific line section consist of several steps. First, the compression of the train paths is made and the value of the infrastructure occupation (in %) is compared with maximum values recommended by UIC in order to determine if the line is congested. If line is considered to be congested, no more additional train paths can be added to the timetable. If capacity consumption is lower than the specific value then the analysis shall be developed further by examine possibility to add more train paths to the timetable. If not possible, then the unused capacity is considered to be lost and cannot be used any further. If possible, the new train paths are added to the timetable and the analysis of capacity consumption starts again with the compression, until the capacity utilization reaches the congestion level.
Capacity consumption for line section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden will be carried out by using RailSys software. Program bases calculations on UIC 406 method, giving the value of infrastructure occupation (in %) as well as analyzes the possibility of incorporating additional train paths into the timetable. The process of analyzing capacity utilization by using RailSys is described more detailed in the next chapter.
47 7 Capacity Calculations
Capacity calculations for he upgrade project are conducted by using RMCon RailSys software, based on assumptions made by Rail Net Denmark and by the author, on UIC 406 described in chapter 6, and on solution for infrastructure changes presented in chapter 5.
7.1 Traffic Assumptions
Base line used for this project exist only in theory and the construction will start in near future in accordance with construction of the Fehmarn Belt tunnel. It is difficult to set up the timetable for not existing line as it has to be based on assumptions and forecasts. However, Rail Net Denmark already has an idea about the number and type of trains travelling through this line section.
Rail Net Denmark’s assumptions for traffic through Fehmarn Belt [42] are as follows:
• 2 freight trains per hour per direction
• One IC train per hour per direction
• One extra IC train in rush hours (4 times/day)
• Regional train from Germany to Nykøbing F. once per two hours
• Number of trains per day: 118 trains total distributed in both direction, herein: 78 freight trains and 40 passenger trains
• Average 2-3 trains per hour per direction
• Minimum headway of 3 minutes
• Rolling stock: – Passenger traffic: ICE3/Oresundtog – Freight traffic: RailJet, EG2300, BR1700 (max length of 835 m)
• Signalling system: – ETCS level 2
These assumptions together with trains’ database can be used as a base for creating exemplary timetable.
48 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
Figure 7.1: Process steps for planning railway traffic in RailSys [40]
7.2 RMCon RailSys
Findings presented in this chapter were obtained by using professional software, RailSys ver. 10. RailSys is used as a tool that enables both technical and operational planning for railway. It allows to control and optimize the planning process of the railway traffic at each of the stages presented in figure 7.1. Infrastructure and Construction is the first step that allows implementation of data about existing assets such as line, signalling systems, but also about restricted utilization on a daily basis as for instance speed restrictions. The analyzed network appears on a user’s interface as a graph consisted of nodes and links. Running time step allows to enter data about rolling stock, insert train paths and calculate track occupation for each element individually. In next step the timetable is made based on data from previous phases. Overview of the starting/stopping patterns, strength and weaknesses of the timetable allows to introduce changes and optimize traffic on the line. In next step the capacity is planned by calculating capacity consumption and remaining line’s capacity. It is also possible to conduct operational, timetable and construction simulations as a next planning step. Finally, documentation, evaluation and data export can be obtained as an output from RailSys [40].
All steps included in planning process allow to retain control and transparency, as well as generate individual solutions for the rail traffic [40].
7.3 Timetable
Optimization of the timetable can be based on a number of different criteria, thus finding the ideal timetable is rather impossible. However, the several various and opposite considerations can be used as a base for creating a good timetable. Generally, timetable’s evaluation is made in accordance with following quality parameters [36]:
• High punctuality is important for passengers as it allows them to create individual time schedule based on trains’ departures/arrivals.
• Direct connections are very beneficial for passengers as transfers are considered to be inconvenient.
49 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
• Good transfer conditions should be guaranteed in case when transfers cannot be avoided. The time between arrival and next departure should be optimized taking walking distance and waiting time into an account.
• Regular departure schedule that is assign to the same platform makes it easier for passengers to remember the time and place form which they will take a train.
• Short travel time with minimized number of stops is beneficial as it allows travellers to reach their destination faster, thus to save time.
• High departure frequency is important when competing with other means of transport.
Total travel time presented in the timetable is composed of number of shorter time phases. These phases are established basing on, for instance capacity consumption and the operational punctuality of the particular line. In general the realized travel time consist of [36]:
• The minimum running time express the travel time of passenger train running in optimal conditions from start station to the destination, that is without any stops, transfers, and omitting other trains on line.
• The running time supplement is assign in order to ensure that expected small operation problems and infrastructure conditions will not aggravate train’s performance in comparison with the existing timetable. The longer time supplement is assigned when temporary infrastructure problems appear.
• Dwell time is a time that passengers need to leave or board the train. Dwell time can be prolonged for the purpose of overtaking trains.
• Minimum transfer time and planned waiting time is the time accommodated for passengers making transfers. When direct connection is not possible, the travel time must include extra time in order to ensure that passengers will be able to make a transfer between two transportation modes.
All time phases combined together give a planned travel time, thus the time that train needs to run through the network.
7.3.1 The running time supplement The running time supplement can be determined by length of the route, the infrastructure’s nature (single/double track) and the rolling stock type. Recommended percentages of time supplement for Denmark are as seen in table 7.1
In recent years in Denmark the political focus on trains’ punctuality has arisen. That explains the big difference between danish and UIC recommendations for percentage of time supplement in the timetable. However, danish train network is often highly utilized and time supplements have
50 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
Table 7.1: Running time supplements in Denmark, compared to UIC recommendations, 2010 [43] Speed Passenger Freight UIC recommendation UIC recommendation [km/h] trains [%] train [%] passenger [%] freight [%] 0-75 3 3 3 (∗ 4 76–100 4 3 3 (∗ 4 101-120 5 3 3 (∗ 4 121-140 7 3 3 (∗ 3-7 (∗∗ 141-160 9 3 4 (∗ 3-7 (∗∗ 161-180 11 3 5 (∗ 3-7 (∗∗ 181-200 13 3 5 (∗ 3-7 (∗∗ 201-250 13 - 6 (∗ - 251-300 13 - 7 (∗ - Comments: (* + fixed supplement: 1 or1,5min/100km (** Depends on train’s weight and speed to be reduced in order to increase capacity on line.
Time supplement used in the upgrade project is estimated according to the danish requirements, based on the speed profile. Using big supplement does not cause any conflicts in timetable, as the number of trains running on Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden line section is rather low. The comparison of running times for trains using either danish or UIC recommendations for the time supplement are conducted in section 7.3.4.
7.3.2 Dwell Time Dwell time is defined as a time that train needs at the station in order to exchange passengers, be overtaken by other train, etc. It is usually difficult for timetable planner to decide how much dwell times a train needs at the station, as it depends also on the time of the day and the day itself (weekday/weekend). The length of minimum dwell time is based on empirical data and the supplements. Supplements in dwell time allows to prevent delays in case when stop time at the station has to be prolonged due to the external events (e.g. school classes, handicapped people etc.) [43]. Dwell times used in capacity analysis are based on the experience from consultancy company (Atkins). Time is adjusted according to the size of the stations as follows:
• 49 s for minimum dwell time
• 54 s for scheduled dwell time
In the upgrade project dwell time is only used by regional trains at the Nykøbing and Holeby stations to exchange passengers, and to reverse the train route at the Holeby station.
51 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
7.3.3 Headways Minimum headway time can be defined as the shortest time between two succeeding trains that allows them to run unhindered at their optimal speed [35]. ETCS level 2 allows to optimize the headway’s times as train drivers rely on on-board unit and standardized Driver Machine Interface (DMI), thus the time needed to change the signal’s aspect can be omitted. DMI gives a driver all necessary information as speed restriction, actual speed, distance to the next target etc [23]. For high speed trains travelling on the line with constant speed, the headway time will be determined by the track gradient and the length of the block sections. In general the headway’s time is the composition on a smaller times intervals, from which the most important ones are braking, block section length, train length, and system’s reaction time [32]. Rail Net Denmark set up the minimum headway time for considered line section to 3 minutes. Based on two diagrams presented in figure 7.2, for maximum speed of 250 km/h and length of block sections approximately 2,000 m, the headway time can be less than 150 seconds, thus the time set by Rail Net Denmark seems reasonable.
Figure 7.2: Diagrams illustrating headway time’s as a functions of block section’s length and gradient [32]
7.3.4 Running Time Calculations Running times for each train in the timetable are calculated automatically in RailSys. The program consist of trains’ database with specifications needed for acceleration and braking times calculations. The basic formulas supporting these calculations are discussed more thorough in Appendix E. Running time calculations in RailSys are made considering other factors as well, like gradient and running time supplement. Figure 7.3 illustrates how the minimum running time is influenced by the gradient. It can be noticed that acceleration is smaller when train moves on the line section with positive gradient.
Running time calculations made by RailSys for each particular train type, direction and speed alternative can be seen in table 7.2. Running times for regional trains IC3 and freight trains running on 250 km/h line do not differ significantly when compared to the running times for line
52 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
Figure 7.3: The relationship between gradient and running time profile speed of 200 km/h, as their maximum speed is lower than 200 km/h and upgrading the speed on line will not influence the running time for these trains. IC3 DE is the regional train running once per 2 hours from Germany to Nykøbing F. station, thus the running time is only calculated for this direction.
The difference in running time can be noticed for Inter City trains, that can travel with the speed closer to the maximum speed allowed on the line. The difference for running times for two alternative speeds (200 km/h vs 250 km/h) are as follows:
• Nykøbig F. - Fehmarn: 00:02:40
• Fehmarn - Nykøbing F.: 00:03:40
The difference in running time for Inter City trains between line speed of 200 km/h and 250 km/h will be further used in socio-economic analysis, as benefit for passengers. The difference is calculated for minimum feasible running times of the trains. On average it is assumed that travel time on this track section will decrease by 3 minutes after upgrading the speed up to 250 km/h.
53 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
Table 7.2: Running times for different types of trains Train type 200 250 NF-FB FB-NF NF-FB FB-NF ICEx 00:19:30 00:19:30 00:16:50 00:15:50 IC3(1 00:13:08 00:12:48 00:13:12 00:12:12 Freight train 00:29:23 00:29:23 00:30:25 00:28:55 IC3 DE - 00:22:56 - 00:23:26 Comments: 1) Regional train IC3 runs on the route Nykøbing F. - Holeby only
7.3.4.1 Time Supplement Percentage
Besides the gradient, the running time calculations depend on percentage of time supplement applied. As shown in table 7.1 the recommendations differ a lot between UIC and Denmark. Lower time supplement allows the train to travel with higher speed, thus the running time is shorter. On the other side, greater percentage of time supplement decrease the possibility of delays.
Percentage of time supplement used as an input for further calculations is based on danish recommendations. As the maximum line speed differs within some track sections, and RailSys allows to choose only one value for the whole route, the percentage of time supplement was chosen based on speed restrictions occurring on line.
The comparison of running times for both danish and UIC recommendations was made and results can be seen in table 7.3.
Table 7.3: Difference between minimum running times when applying UIC and danish recommendations Maximum speed 200 km/h 250 km/h % of time supplement UIC (5%) Denmark (11%) UIC (5%) Denmark (11%) Vmax feasible 189 km/h 178 km/h 224 km/h 208 km/h Minimum run time 1106 s 1170 s 962 s 1017 s Difference 64 s 55 s
The difference is calculated for Inter City train on the line section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden. It can be seen that with decreased size of the time supplement the travel time can be decreased by one minute approximately. Considered line section does not suffer from capacity problems but it may change in the future, when demand increases. Reduction of time supplement could be a solution for lines that cannot accommodate all requested trains.
54 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
7.3.5 Train Types Vehicle’s dynamic parameters have a big influence on acceleration and braking time, thus on the total running time. These specifications are defined for each rolling stock type and can be find in a RailSys database. The program has a train type template for each kind of vehicles use in Denmark. Train types used in this project, together with their specifications are presented in table 7.4.
Table 7.4: Specifications for types of trains used in timetable Godstog Description Symbol Unit ICEx IC3 BR 189-1600 Train/unit length - m 615 200 176 2 Start acceleration a0 m/s 0.173 0.592 1.0 Maximum speed vmax km/h 140 250 180 Train weight ton 2000 250 308
Braking specifications are described in the further section.
Rolling stock type chosen for the project is based on the type of trains commonly used in the Danish network. These trains are: • Regional train type IC3 • Inter City train type ICEx • Freight train type BR 189 -1600
7.3.6 Braking Curves Train that runs on ETCS level 2 is equipped with on-board computer that supervises the position and speed of the train, but also predicts the upcoming speed restrictions based on train braking dynamics and track characteristics. The prediction of the speed decrease versus distance is defined as a braking curve [24]. The braking curve related to the speed decrease caused by application of the emergency brake is called EBD (Emergency Brake Deceleration) curve.
From the measured train speed and the EBD, the necessary distance to stop the train is calculated by the ETCS computer in real time. This distance will determine a location of Emergency Brake Intervention (EBI), which is the point beyond which the human in charge will be bypassed and train will apply the brake automatically. Besides that, the ETCS computer provides information that assist the driver and let him to drive the train comfortable, within the appropriate speed limits.
As mentioned before, the braking performance depends on train’s dynamic parameters and track characteristics and can be calculated from mathematical formulas. However, due to the complexity and lack of specific information about rolling stock, the values used as an input in RailSys are values given by European Railway Agency as an example of input parameters, and can be seen in table 7.5.
55 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
Table 7.5: Braking rates for particular train types and speeds [24] Speed [km/h] Braking rate [m/s2] ICEx IC3 Freight train 116 1.30 1.30 1.05 120 1.30 1.30 1.05 131 1.30 1.30 - 150 1.30 1.30 - 180 1.30 1.30 - 200 1.10 - -
7.3.7 Block sections The infrastructure is divided into block sections. For safety reasons the signalling system ensure that only one train at the time occupies the block section [34].
The length of the block sections is based on the blocking time theory and shall be optimized for individual case. Experience from real life operation shows that suggested approximate length of the block section is 2 km [42]. Therefore, about 2 km long block sections will be used in the capacity analysis for the upgrade project.
7.3.8 Speed Profiles In theory the speed of the train should follow a given speed profile. In practice, train needs extra time to accelerate or brake thus the speed profile cannot be followed precisely. Also, as described before, the running time supplement does not allow train to follow minimum possible running time. The speed profiles presented in this section reflect the maximum line speed allowed on the line, without taking running time curves into considerations. Better overview of the speed profiles can be found in Appendix F.
7.3.8.1 Speed Profile for Base Line with Line Speed 200 km/h Works on line section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden will be coordinated with the construction of the Fehmarn belt tunnel. The speed profile for this section, which is considered as a base line, was calculated from alignment models delivered by Rail Net Denmark. Speed profile shown in figure 7.4 considers right track only. As mentioned in previous chapters, the line will be expend to double track, therefore the speed profiles differ slightly, especially near Nykøbing station.
It can be seen that it was possible to obtain speed of 200 km/h on almost the whole section. Speed is restricted to 120 km/h in the area around Nykøbing station and Guldborg Sund bridge. The short speed increase at the beginning refers to the straight line section that allows the speed of 200 km/h, however the train does not have enough space to accelerate, thus the speed remains at 120 km/h.
56 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
Figure 7.4: Speed profile for right track of the line section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden for line speed 200 km/h
7.3.8.2 Speed Profile for Speed 250 km/h Upgrade to 250 km/h is possible for most of the line section. As same as in base line case, the speed has to be restricted in the Nykøbing station area and Guldborg Sund bridge. Also, the speed profiles for left and right track differ slightly, as left track is about to be built and have to be adjusted to existing city architecture. Speed profile for line speed 250 km/h can be seen in figure 7.5.
57 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
Figure 7.5: Speed profile for right track of the line section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden for line speed 250 km/h
7.4 Exemplary Timetable
Based on assumptions from previous sections, the exemplary timetable for line section Nykøbing Falster – Puttgarden can be created. In order to do this, the departure time from the first station, that is Nykøbing F. is established taking traffic assumptions into considerations. Then the departure times for all trains are entered into RailSys, which creates timetable based on running times for each train’s type, given dwell time, supplements etc. Then potential conflicts are detected and timetable is adjusted manually, to fit constraints such as headway and number of trains per hour.
The timetable presented in this section is made for peak hours only, as railway line is the most occupied during this time. There are usually two peak rush hours, morning and evening one, that is when people are going to and coming back from work/school etc. As Rail Net Denmark assumed one extra IC train in rush hours (4 times/day), the rush hours can be established in time periods (for weekdays only):
• Morning peak: 7:00 - 9:00
• Evening peak: 15:00 - 17:00
In addition, following assumption about stopping patterns are made:
• Inter City trains can run with maximum speed of 250 km/h; trains departure from Copenhagen Central station and arrive to Hamburg, without stopping on the way (and vice versa)
58 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
• Regional trains can run with maximum speed of 180 km/h; trains stop at Nykøbing F. and Holeby stations
• Freight trains can run with maximum speed of 120 km/h; trains pass Nykøbing F. and Holeby stations without stopping
During the peak hours it is important to give priority to passenger trains and freight trains should be accommodated in less busy hours if possible. Thus, it can be assumed that during the one hour of peak the train sequence follows the pattern: 2 ICE3 trains - 2 freight trains - 1 regional train.
Timetable was created according to the traffic assumptions from Rail Net Denmark. When construction of Fehmarn Belt fixed link finishes and the trains start to run on the line, the timetable will be highly dependent on the departure times that are feasible for Copenhagen and Hamburg stations. These stations are rather busy and the departure times for trains going through fixed link may cause conflicts or require overtaking at the line section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden. Timetable created for upgrade project needs is made in a way that avoids conflicts and train overtaking.
7.4.1 Graphical Timetable In order to create the timetable an information about the route, departure time from first station, type of the train, time supplement, and dwell times are entered into RailSys interface. Afterwards, program creates the timetable and generates running times and block occupations for each of the trains. Graphical and tabular timetables for line speed of 200 km/h and 250 km/h, for morning peak hours 7:00 - 9:00 can be seen in Appendix G.
While analyzing the traffic during the peak period it can be noticed that there is no need to overtake slower fright trains by high speed passenger trains. However, the further increase in demand may lead to increased number of trains on line. In case when it could not be avoided, overtaking could take a place at the station in Holeby. The station will consist of two main and two side tracks, and would be a good point for overtaking, especially when going south as about 18 kilometers Fehmarn Belt tunnel section is coming afterwards.
The overview of the graphical timetable for line speed 250 km/h can be seen in figure 7.6, where the red corridors represent Inter City trains, green ones represent regional trains, and blue corridors represent freight trains. The bigger figure can be seen in Appendix G.
59 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
Figure 7.6: Exemplary timetable for line speed 250 km/h
7.5 Capacity Analysis
Calculations of capacity consumption are carried out automatically by RailSys, based on input information described in previous sections. Process is carried out as follows:
1. The line for which capacity analysis will be carried out is selected.
2. Parameters of the line are set up (as for instance calculation period or directional operation).
3. Compression of train paths included in the timetable.
4. Calculation of the infrastructure occupation time and capacity utilization.
5. Determination of available paths.
The calculation period for capacity analysis starts at 7:00 am till 9:00 am, which is assumed to be peak time on this track section. During the compression, the first train that is relevant for calculation is copied and set behind the last train as a "dummy train". The occupation time is given as a difference between the starting time of the calculation period and the time of the first block section occupation of the "dummy train".
The comparison of results of capacity utilization as calculated by RailSys can be seen in table 7.6. It can be noticed that the capacity consumption is greater for line speed of 250 km/h. It is due to the significant difference between average speed of the trains running on this line. High speed
60 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
Table 7.6: Capacity calculations 200 km/h 250 km/h Calculation period [s] 7200 7200 Occupation time [s] 3316 4001 Trains compressed 19 18 Capacity utilization time [s] 3316 4001 Capacity utilization [%] 46.1 55.6 Average headway [s] 175 222 passenger trains run with average speed of 212 km/h while speed of freight trains is 115 km/h on average, thus more unused capacity is generated. Therefore, during the compression process the train paths occupy more space due to the difference in running times.
The results from capacity analysis do not reflect the "real life" situation correctly. The timetable made in order to be used as an input was created only for this particular line section, without taking into consideration start point and final destination. Thus it was possible to create timetable without conflicts and overtaking. However, the issue gets more complex when capacity analysis is made for the whole line (for instance Copenhagen - Hamburg). Copenhagen is rather congested station and trains departure from it would be assign to the specific time, taking into an account other trains moving in the network. Therefore, the timetable for the section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden shall be based on the times when trains departure from the main station. However, modelling this kind of the network would be very complicated and time consuming, thus the capacity analysis is based on a simplified timetable made exclusively for considered track section.
It should be also highlighted that overtaking slow freight trains by fast Inter City trains will increase capacity significantly due to the long braking and acceleration curves for freight trains. Therefore, accelerating or braking freight train will consume much of the line capacity.
Unused capacity form the timetables for line speeds 200 km/h and 250 km/h will be further investigated for possibility to accommodate extra train paths.
7.5.1 Robustness of the Timetable Capacity of the railway line is an important issue for infrastructure managers. Number of train in the timetable is also significant for passengers, as more trains equal more flexibility. Passengers are satisfied when the trains run according to the timetable. The comparison of the planned timetable and the real performance of the trains reflect the robustness of the timetable. In order to check if timetable is robust, it is necessary to investigate delays occurring on the line, their size, and how they influence the network.
In the project, the robustness of the timetables for line speeds 200 km/h and 250 km/h is investi- gated by identifying delays occurring on the line. It is done in RailSys by performing simulation
61 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS of the timetable. However, the timetable created for the project was intentionally established in a way that allows to avoid conflicts and overtaking, thus there are no delays neither in 200 km/h nor in 250 km/h timetable. Lack of delays in the network enable to classify both timetables as robust.
As mentioned before, realistic timetable would differ from the one used in the upgrade project and may lead to number of delays occurring in the network, influencing not only Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden section, but also spreading through the bigger part of the line. It may be a case that upgrade of the speed on the line would reduce delays, thus be beneficial for passengers as trains would be more punctual. However, it is rather impossible to estimate the impact that speed upgrade up to 250 km/h would have on the network. Therefore the aspect is not investigated more thoroughly in the further parts of the report.
7.5.2 Additional Train Paths Furthermore, the program analyze the network and determines additional train paths that can be added to the timetable. The reference train has to be chosen as a model for additional paths. When new paths are added, no existing paths in the line section are modified. All newly generated paths are added to the graphical timetable and listed in the table. The additional path cannot be added to timetable in a case when [41]:
• Additional paths result in capacity utilization greater than 100
• No more trains can be added in calculation period due to conflicts with other paths.
• Calculation period is almost finished and additional path cannot fit completely into the time frame.
Even though the capacity utilization is greater for line speed of 250 km/h, it is possible to accommodate 5 extra passenger trains within the two hours peak period. With additional 5 high speed passenger trains in timetable, the capacity consumption reaches 55.9% and is still far from congestion threshold. For line speed 200 km/h, even though the capacity consumption is lower, it is only possible to accommodate two additional passenger train path. The timetable conditions do not allow to add any new freight train paths neither for 200 km/h nor for 250 km/h solution. RailSys establishes route for additional regional trains to runs between Nykøbing F. and Fehmarnbelt stations, when is reality regional trains run on the route Nykøbing F. - Holeby (except regional train from Germany, going to Nykøbing F.). Results show that it is possible to add extra 3 regional trains in 250 km/h timetable. Results from searching for additional train paths by RailSys can be seen in table 7.7. However, it has to be taken into an account that RailSys added only those train routs that departure and arrive to the destination withing the considered period time (2 hours). Creating the timetable for longer period of time could give different results. Furthermore, as mentioned before, the analyzed timetable is created basing on assumptions about the future traffic at Nykøbing F. and Fehmarn.
The main purpose of adding new trains to the timetable is to check the future possibilities of expending the traffic on the line section and to analyze the potential of unused capacity. Unused
62 CHAPTER 7. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
Table 7.7: Additional train paths found by RailSys 200 km/h 250 km/h Extra IC trains 2 5 Capacity with extra IC trains 48% 55.9% Trains in outward direction 1/1 3/2 Extra Regional trains 0 3 Capacity with extra Regional trains - 69.4% Trains in outward direction - 2/1 Extra freight trains 0 0 Capacity with extra freight trains - - Trains in outward direction - - capacity in timetable for line speed of 250 km/h allows to accommodate more trains, even though the capacity utilization of the initial timetable is higher. However, the capacity consumption with additional trains is still below the congestion threshold, which means that some capacity is lost. Again, the result can be different when realistic timetable would be analyzed. Number of trains accommodated in the current timetable is enough to satisfy the demand on the line. However, with the future increase in line’s popularity and number of passengers, the timetable shall be analyzed for possibilities of future expansion.
63 8 Project Description
Following chapter presents the project description and implementation of the changes in track geometry for line speed of 250 km/h, based on findings from previous chapters. Description of overall works to be carried on can be found in particular sections and will be used as a foundation for budgeting, and further for socio-economic profitability analysis. The main focus is to present what changes that will have to be introduced in order to prepare line for speed of 250 km/h. Two budgets alternatives will be considered:
1. Upgrade project will be carried on on the already constructed track section, with the line speed of 200 km/h.
2. Adjustments made for speed upgrade will be implemented in the project during its planning phase. Plans for track section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden for the line speed of 200 km/h already exist. It is necessary to evaluate extra materials and work connected to preparing the line for the line speed of 250 km/h.
In both cases the plans for the line speed of 200 km/h are used as a base line. Description of the project follows the danish requirements for upgrade of the line, and presents the type of work and modifications that have to be carried out in order to upgrade the line speed from 200 km/h to 250 km/h.
The chapter follows Rail Net Denmark’s structure for New Budgeting.
8.1 Budgeting and Financial Setup
The main purpose of New Budgeting, published by Ministry of Transport in 2006, is to use already implemented projects as a base for ongoing and future budgeting of projects. In accordance with New Budgeting structure, the cost estimate will be made for 12 different aspects connected to railway project.
Figure 8.1 presents the Rail Net Denmark’s Phase model, that defines five different project’s phases from initial idea to evaluation. As the project is going through the phases the number of details is increasing, thus the uncertainties are decreasing accordingly. Due to the occurring uncertainties, the budget of the project in definition phase includes 50% supplement, while phase 2 includes 30% of construction cost as a supplement.
Project presented in the thesis is considered as a "screening" project and can be allocated before the definition phase, thus the budget for the project will be increased by 50% due to the supplement for unexpected expanses.
64 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Figure 8.1: Rail Net Denmark’s phase model based on [6]
8.2 Assumptions
At the screening phase project meets many uncertainties and limitations due to the lack of specific information and data. In order to constrain project boundaries and obtain results as close to the real ones as possible, a number of assumptions have to be made.
• The project considers an upgrade on the line from stationing 220+646 to 275+672
• The project boundary is Nykøbing Falster station and the German coast, where the tunnel ends
• Only main tracks are taken into consideration for upgrade and budgeting
• Calculations are made for the double track with the line speed of 250 km/h, using left track geometry as a base (no distinction between right and left track geometry)
• The Fehmarnbelt tunnel is assumed to be placed on slab track and is not included in some of the descriptions and calculations
Using assumptions would give approximate values for parameters presented in the further sections of the chapter.
8.2.1 Track Technical initiatives for track are described in this section, based on a solution for speed up- grade of 250 km/h, presented in previous chapters. That includes changing track geometry and making cant adjustments. Base line used for the project is track alignment designed for a speed of 200 km/h, thus the track changes must comply with the danish requirements for upgrades.
Drawings SCH-01 and SCH-02 in Appendix K present an overview of the work that needs to be carried on in order to upgrade the speed between Nykøbing F. and Rødby. The schematic layout of the section, as well as different activities are presented together for comparison between base line and proposed alignment.
8.2.1.1 Track layout The track layout for base line can be seen on the top part of the drawings SCH-01 and SCH-02 in Appendix K. Most of the work consist of changing the cant in curves, which does not require changing track layout. The radius was changed for 4 curves as it was not possible to increase the
65 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION speed otherwise. Moreover, it was necessary to increase the length of the transition curves in 4 curves.
Switching and crossing Lls_002a/b, before Holeby station has to be moved towards the Nykøbing F. station due to the changes in radius of the curve located between stationing 248+986 and 250+443. It is necessary to keep the switching and crossing in that area as it allows trains to change track before entering the station in Holeby. As mentioned in chapter 3 placing S&C in a curve generates extra cost due to extra work like bending elements. Also, regulations for S&C located in the curve are more strict. Taking these considerations into an account, it was decided to move the crossover by around 30 meters toward Nykøbing F. station, on the straight track element.
8.2.1.1.1 Track Layout in the Fehmarn Belt tunnel
Due to the lack of detailed alignment plans it was not possible to investigate details of the track layout changes in the Fehmarn Belt tunnel and track section on Lolland that leads to the tunnel portal. According to the calculations, it is necessary to change the length of transition curves in this track section in order to increase the speed up to 250 km/. However, this type of work is usually connected to the changes in the track layout. Simple calculations of the track displacement are presented in the Appendix L. Calculated track displacement will be used to estimate the earth work in this area.
8.2.1.2 Speed Profile and Curvature
Proposed speed profile and curvature for line speeds 200 km/h and 250 km/h are presented in the bars 2, 3 and 6, below schematic track layout in drawings SCH-01 and SCH-02 in Appendix K. In technical report about speed upgrade between Hobro-Aalborg and Ringsted-Odense from 2015, Sweco (former Grontmij) presents the type of work connected to the size of the displacement, as [31]:
• 0 - 50 mm: implemented within regular track adjustments
• 51 - 100 mm: implemented within extended track adjustments, still changes are carried out within the existing track bed
• 101 -200 mm: reconstruction of drainage
• > 200 mm: drainage reconstruction and new track bed
Due to the changes in radii, the curvature of the track will have to be modified on 4,862 meters of the track. Displacement of the track in upgrade project is calculated in further part of the chapter, in Earth work section.
66 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
8.2.1.3 Superstructure The higher line speed requires better superstructure due to the larger tension and shock waves. Therefore, the track bed has to be designed in accordance with maximum line speed.
Superstructure consist of the ballast profile and the track construction (as sleepers, rails, fastenings). The steps describing activities required for both ballast profile and track construction for line speed of 250 km/h are described further in this section.
8.2.1.3.1 Track Construction for 250 km/h
Plans for 200 km/h base line are made for superstructure type UIC60 Dmp. For line speed of 250 km/h a suitable type of superstructure is type Dme, which means that upgrade project will require different sleepers (S16) and fastenings. Dme superstructure is preferable for high speed as it is able to withstand greater forces associated with higher speed.
Crossovers already existing in the base line are not addressed in upgrade project. The switching and crossing Lls_002a/b moved due to the changes in curve radius will remain type 8390, UIC60-R2500-1:27.5 as before.
8.2.1.3.2 Ballast Profile for 250 km/h
Ballast profile must comply with requirements for speed 250 km/h presented in section 3.3.1, chapter 3. It is assumed that the base line comply with ballast profile standards for speed of 200 km/h. As regulations differ between considered line speeds, minor ballast changes need to be implemented. Moreover, new track bed is needed in curves where due to the changes in radius the track displacement is greater than 200 mm.
Due to the speed upgrade from 200 km/h to 250 km/h following changes have to be made: • Sub ballast thickness has to be increased from 0.27 m to 0.3 m • Track bed width has to be increased from 3.0 m to 3.8 m • Track center distance has to be increased from 4,250 mm to 4,500 mm The amount of additional materials needed for upgrade is estimated from the cross section area along the changed track section.
A principal cross section for line speed 250 km/h is presented in figure 8.2. The more detailed drawing can be seen in Appendix K.
Track in Fehmarn Belt tunnel will be placed on the slab track, which is ballastless type of track. However, requirements for the track in tunnel and slab track are not considered in the upgrade project due to the large range of the topics connected to these matter. It is assumed that the cross section in the tunnel will remain unchanged.
67 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Figure 8.2: Typical cross section for straight track with speed 250 km/h (all dimensions in [mm])
8.2.1.3.3 Cant Optimization
Cross section presented in figure 8.2 shows the ballast profile of the track without the cant. In track section with applied cant, the additional ballast is needed. The example of ballast profile for the track with cant can be seen in figure 8.3. The amount of extra ballast is roughly estimated basing on cross section area and the size of the cant.
Furthermore, regulations for ballast profile require increased track bed width in dependence of cant size. It is the case when ballast shoulder is 3.0 m long, thus the line speed is less/equal 200 km/h. It is assumed that the work connected to increasing the track bed width for speed lower than 200 km/h is already done and will not be included in cost estimate.
The changes in ballast profile are summarized in table 8.1. Values are calculated for double track section between stationing 222+432 and 256+816 (34,384 km), while 18 km long tunnel section is omitted in calculations. Volume of the additional ballast and sub ballast are calculated for approximate values of parameters describing ballast profile, which is connected to uncertainty in relation to the real demand.
Recommended ballast shoulder width for 200 km/h is 550 mm, and is 50 mm wider than required ballast shoulder for 250 km/h. Cross section for 200 km/h shows that the track section is designed with 550 mm wide ballast shoulder. Even though it can be reduced, it is decided to leave it
68 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Figure 8.3: Typical cross section for track with cant for speed 250 km/h (all dimensions in [mm]) (additional ballast marked blue) unchanged. Also, ballast thickness is planned to be minimum 350 mm which is minimum required value for line speed 250 km/h. Therefore, the ballast thickness can remain unchanged as well. The thickness of the sub ballast has to be increased as 270 mm does not meet requirements for minimum sub ballast thickness for line speed of 250 km/h. Cross section of the track design for 200 km/h can be seen in figure 8.4. It is assumed that other values, not presented in the cross section, comply with requirements for line speed of 200 km/h.
Table 8.1: Summary of the ballast and sub ballast volumes needed for upgrade project, based on schematic overview and cross sections 250 km/h Comment Change of cant size 16,645 m Based on additional ballast for: cant 100 mm: 0.63 m2 Ballast supplement 5245 m3 cant 50 mm: 0.315 m2 Extending track center distance 28,504 m Based on cross section areas: 200 km/h: 3.59 m2 Additional ballast 285.04 m3 250 km/h: 3.60 m2 Based on cross section areas: Sub ballast supplement 34,384 m3 200 km/h: 2.77 m2 250 km/h: 3.77 m2
The length of the section that needs to be extended because of change in track center distance is based on calculations included in section 8.3.2. Earth work. Also, even though the ballast
69 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Figure 8.4: Cross section for straight track with speed 200 km/h (all dimensions in [mm] if not stated differently) [9] thickness and ballast shoulder length do not differ between 200 km/h and 250 km/h, the area of cross section vary because of the different track center distances.
The reference for calculating the additional ballast caused by change in cant is the area of the cross section of track with the cant 100 mm. Change of the cant in 250 km/h track design is within the range 0 - 50 mm (compared to the base line). It is assumed that cant of 50 mm requires half of the additional ballast needed for cant 100 mm. Moreover, it is assumed that amount of additional ballast in a curve with cant equals the amount of extra ballast needed for cant of 50 mm, without considering the real change of the cant size.
70 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
8.2.2 Earth Work Earth work refers to the activities connected to substructure, drainage, and embankments. Drainage of the track is not the focus point of the project and regulations were not described in the norm foundation. However, the general description of the drainage on the track section has to be taken into an account, as it will be further included in the cost estimation. The estimation of the earth work is based on number of general assumptions, thus contributes to the big uncertainty in final cost, as earth work makes up a large proportion of the total cost estimate.
8.2.2.1 Soil Handling: Upgrade Work connected to track upgrade can be very diverse, depending on the existing conditions and changes required for upgrade project. Major part of the track section between Nykøbing F. and Puttgarden is designed with the track center distance of 4,250 mm, which according to the requirements is too close for the speed of 250 km/h. That means that major part of the track will have to be displaced by 250 mm, which according to the type of work connected to the track displacement mentioned in subsection 8.3.1.2. requires drainage reconstruction and new track bed. Table 8.2 shows the length of the track and the distance of displacement that has to be made in order to obtain track center distance of 4,500 mm, required for speed 250 km/h.
Table 8.2: Track displacement size in particular track sections between Nykøbing F. and Fehmern Belt Stationing start Stationing end Distance Track displacement 220+644 220+840 196 m 0 mm 222+840 222+890 50 m 101-200 mm 222+890 249+569 26,679 m >200 mm 249+569 250+040 471 m 101 - 200 mm 250+040 250+210 170 m 51 - 100 mm 250+210 250+400 190 m 0 - 50 mm 250+400 253+338 2,938 m 0 mm
Also, curves which radii were changed in order to allow greater speed were displaced too. Taking into consideration the widest distance of displacement connected to the change in radius, and graduate decrease of displacement towards the fixed points, it can be set that on average the displacement distance will be:
1. 224+499 - 227+006 (2,507 m)(abutting curves) - average displacement of 0.5 m
2. 248+988 - 250+445 (1,457 m) - average displacement of 1.5 m
3. 252+818 - 253+717 (899 m) - average displacement of 0.7 m
Curve marked as 1 above is placed on a track section with displacement greater than 200 mm (due to change in track center distance), thus track displacement caused by radius change can
71 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION be connected to already mentioned works. Curves 2 and 3 are placed at sections where the track displacement connected to track center distance is lower than 200 mm. Also, two curves placed on the track section leading to the portal of the Fehmarn Belt tunnel will be displaced by approximately 110 mm. Table 8.3 presents the length and work required in order to displace track by required distance.
Table 8.3: Length of the track section and type of work required for track displacement Length Required work 2,190 m No track displacement required (0 mm displacement) 2,224 m Reconstruction of the drainage (101-200 mm displacement) 28,454 m Drainage reconstruction and new track bed (>200 mm displacement)
8.2.2.1.1 Estimation of the Amount of Soil
Amount of extra soil needed for track displacement and widening is based on a rough estimations about height and slope of embankment and on the overview of the terrain. Basing on the cross section of the terrain and longitudinal profile of the tracks, it is assumed that the reference level for the track is 6 m above the sea level, thus:
• 30% of the line is constructed in cut
• 70% of the line is constructed in fill
Upgrade project does not include construction of the new track. The amount of soil needed for the upgrade is considered only for the purpose of increasing track center distance, excluding the calculation of earth balance connected to cut and fill volumes.
Based on the cross section presented in [30] and average slope it can be assumed:
• The average embankment height is 8 m
• The slope of the embankment is 1:2
The approximate amount of the soil needed for the track widening is based on findings presented in this section and can be seen in table 8.4. Moreover, it is assumed that increasing track center distance will be carried out by moving left track in relation to the right track. Displacement will be carried out for both tracks.
Summarizing, the total approximate volume of the soil needed for the track widening is 59,577 m3.
72 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Table 8.4: Amount of soil needed for increasing the track center distance Track length Displacement Average cross section area Volume of the soil 2,190 m 0 mm 0 m2 0 m3 2,224 m 101 - 200 mm 1.2 m2 2,669 m3 28,454 m >200 mm 2 m2 56,908 m3
8.2.2.1.2 Drainage
Displacement of the track greater than 100 mm requires the reconstruction of the drainage. The purpose of drainage is to prevent flooding, collapse of embankments, weakening of infrastructure. Basing on the finding from the section, the drainage has to be reconstructed on the 28.5 kilometers of the track section between Nykøbing and Fehmarn Belt.
8.2.3 Bridges and Constructions The section about Bridges and Constructions covers the out-of-level crossings between rails and roads, but also passenger crossings at the station. Structure gauge is usually the main focus point at the upgrading projects. However, in this project the additional attention is brought to increase in track center distance, that in some points will increase by 250 mm and may require widening of the bridges.
The track section from Nykøbing Falster to Fehmarn tunnel includes 10 rail bridges and 12 road bridges.
Upgrade project for 250 km/h will require to widen bridges on the track section where the track center distance is lower than 4,500mm. Also, the height of the structure gauge of the 200 km/h is 5,780 mm, while the height of 250 km/h structure gauge is 6,790 mm, hence it is 1,010 mm higher.
Rebuilding bridges in order to fit the structure gauge and track center distance for 250 km/h would be very costly, as most of the road bridges would have to be demolished. Preparing the bridges for the speed of 250 km/h in a planning phase would lead to the lower budget for the future upgrade plans, as bridges would be able to handle the high speed.
Cost estimation for work connected to bridges is based on the widening and lifting the bridges. Other costs, as for examples cost of lowering the roads are omitted.
73 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
8.2.4 Electrification System Electrification system covers the activities connected to installing an overhead catenary system. Electrification between Ringsted and Nykøbing Falster is already being carried out and is planned to be finished latest in 2024. Electrification of the track section between Nykøbing F. and Fehmarnbelt will be coordinated with the opening of the tunnel.
The building of the tunnel has not started yet but is planned to take around 8.5 year to finish. Due to the long construction period, the exact placement of catenary masts between Nykøbing F. and tunnel’s portal is not decided yet. However, it is assumed that catenary poles will be located according to the structural gauge for the speed of 200 km/h, that is with the clearance of 3 m. The track widening planned for the speed upgrade project will cause the track dis- placement of 0.25 m on the most of the section length. That will also require moving the catenary masts accordingly to the track. Also, the location of the poles will have to modified for the crossover Lls_002a/b, which is about to be relocated. Future investigation will reveal the details of adjustments. For the upgrade project, the rough cost of relocation of the pole is estimated.
When considering an alternative when the upgrade is done for already existing line, the overhead catenary wire will have to be raised in order to fit the gauge for the line speed of 250 km/h.
8.2.5 Power Supply Besides of providing power supply necessary to run the trains on the track, the power supply also includes auxiliary systems, as [28]:
• Turnout heating
• Ticket machines
• Lightning on platform and marshalling yards
• Interlocking and signalling systems
• Additional systems: electrical information boards, cooling and ventilation, elevators etc
It is assumed that the considered line section is equipped with all auxiliary systems. Estimating the power supply requires many detailed calculations and is not a focus subject of the upgrade project. However, rough estimation of extra power supply needed to run Inter City trains with higher speed is made for socio-economic analysis purpose.
74 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
8.2.6 Interlocking and Remote Control Term Interlocking and Remote Control refers to the subsystems as [29]:
• Interlocking, line block system and train protection
• Train detection
• Points (switches)
• Level crossings
• Signals
• Remote control
Signalling system that will be implemented on Fehmarnbelt fixed link is ETCS level 2, which is radio based system. The major difference between existing signalling system is replacement of the traditional signals with static marker boards. However, signals can still be used for interoperability or fall-back. Information about the movement authority is distributed to the driver via GSM-R radio connected with Radio Block Center (RBC). RBC uses information from interlocking system (track occupancy, state of points) and from the trains (position reports) to generate movement authority. The basis of the ETCS L2 signalling system are shown in figure 8.5.
Figure 8.5: The basis of the ETCS L2 signalling system [44]
Implementation of ETCS L2 system in Denmark will result in increased punctuality and capacity. The cost of using ETCS L2 system is associated with big uncertainty as the detailed cost estimation of the system is not available.
75 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
8.2.7 IT, Tele and Transmission Systems The IT, Tele and Transmission Systems area of the project covers following fields: • Telephone system
• Radio system
• Transmission and data network system
• Traffic information systems Upgrade project assumes that the new signalling system covers an upgrade on the communication systems as telephone, radio, and transmission systems. It is already decided to implement the new signalling system on the line between Nykøbing F. and Puttgarden, thus the cost of upgrading the railway communication systems is considered to be already covered and will not be included in the project budgeting.
8.2.8 Constructions Constructions refer to the design of the platforms located along the line. There are two stations placed along the section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden, where regional trains stop. Both stations are equipped with side tracks, where trains can overtake each others in case it is needed. Speed upgrade up to 250 km/h requires more thorough investigation of the platforms.
8.2.8.1 Platform Design for 250 km/h: Nykøbing Falster Station in Nykøbing Falster is an existing station, thus it will only be generally checked for compatibility with danish and international requirements for platform design. Station is placed in a curve so it was not possible to increase the speed significantly without re-designing platforms and the station layout. Due to the great cost that would be generated by rebuilding the station, it was decided to increase the speed by optimizing the cant only. That lead to an increase of speed at the station from 120 km/h to 150 km/h.
Currently, there is a 415 meters long platform located between main tracks, with track center distance of 13.53 meters. As mentioned in chapter 3, there are no danish regulations concerning the length of the platforms. However, the TSI norm connects the length of the platform with the line category. For speed between 120 km/h and 200 km/h the minimum length of the platform shall be withing the range of 200-400 meters, thus it can be noticed that the platform along the main tracks complies with this number.
Width of the platform depends on the speed on the line. For speed lower than 160 km/h, the width of the danger area shall be 0.85 m. Freeway shall be minimum 2 meters wide for the speed lower than 200 km/h. Taking these values into consideration it can be calculated that a minimum width of the platform for speed of 150 km/h is 3.7 m. It is also necessary to add the station offset. The increase in speed at the station area (from 120 km/h up to 150 km/h) required changing the cant from 0 mm to 40 mm (right track) and to 50 mm (left track), the height and offset of the platform
76 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Table 8.5: Platform height and offset for Nykøbing station Left track Right track Platform height [mm] 518,2 613,2 Offset [mm] 1680,8 1646,6 will change (see figure 3.8) and have to be recalculated. Offset and platform height calculated for certain conditions can be seen in table 8.5. Summarizing, the minimum track center distance to accommodate the platform shall be 8.5 meters. However, this number is not realistic due to the fact that the platform is located between tracks, thus it has to be widened by the width of objects located at the platform, as for instance stairs to the platform bridge/tunnel, benches, ticket machines etc. Current track center distance of 13.53 meters gives additional 5 meters to accommodate those facilities.
It is assumed that platform width at the Nykøbing station fulfill the requirements. However, the platform height and offset will have to be adjusted for the increased cant in the main tracks.
8.2.8.2 Platform Design for 250 km/h: Holeby Station in Holeby will be newly built station, located on the straight track section around 5 km to the north from existing Rødby station. It will consist of 2 main track with 2 side tracks. Newly built stations, besides of standard regulations, shall also comply with regulations con- cerning the expected number of passengers, which specify the minimum area of the platform. The maximum speed that can be achieved on the main tracks at the Holeby station area is 250 km/h.
The track distance between the main track and side track at Holeby station is 5.8 m. The two option for placement of the platforms can be investigated:
• Two platforms located between main tracks and side tracks respectively
• Two platforms located on the sides, along the side tracks
New station in Holeby will be used as a stop for regional trains, and for overtaking trains before the Fehamrnbelt tunnel. Information about the current/past railway traffic between Nykøbing F. and Holeby does not exist as there is no railway connection between these two cities. Due to the lack of information it is difficult to estimate the future demand at the station. The uncertainty about traffic at Holeby could lead to wrong calculations, thus area of the platform will be omitted in the analysis of the platforms placement.
According to the BN1-9-2 regulations, it is not allowed for passengers to stand at the plat- form along the track with the line speed of 250 km/h. As the goal of this thesis is to upgrade the speed up to 250 km/h it is assumed that limiting the speed to the permitted range is not an option.
77 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Considering the maximum speed on the side track to be as same as maximum speed allowed at the turnout, which for type 1:19 is 100 km/h, the requirements for the platform are as presented in table 8.6. The width of the platform is calculated assuming that it is single side platform, without any objects.
Table 8.6: Parameters describing new platform in Holeby [22][4] Permitted speed 100 km/h Platform width 2.85 m Platform height 550 mm Offset 945 mm Platform length 200 - 400 m
Moreover, considering the line speed on the main track to be 250 km/h, the platform located between main and side track shall be located outside of the structure gauge of the main track, which is minimum 3 meters from the track center. It should also be equipped with safety panels from the main track side. Summarizing, in case when platform is located between main and side track, the minimum track center distance shall be 7.52 m. It should be also considered that the platform would have to be widened by the width of the stairs of platform bridge and other facilities located on the platform.
If the decision about limiting the speed on the main tracks to 200 km/h would be made, the minimum track center distance required to allocate the platform (two sided, no objects) between main and side track would be 7.54 m. For both cases the track center distance is greater than the base line distance of 5.8 m, thus it is not possible to build platforms in those locations. However, if this option of platform placement would be preferable, the turnouts would have to be relocated in or- der to obtain the greater track center distance, thus the whole side track would have to be prolonged.
The option of placing the platform on the side along the side tracks seems like a better alternative. Single sided platforms would have to be at least 2.85 m wide, built with an offset of 0.945 m. It can be argued that the land acquisition would be larger in this case, however the other alternative requires greater land acquisition as well, taking into an account increasing the track center distance. Considering the possible costs, the location of the platforms on the side, along the side tracks is chosen as a preferable option. Cross section for platform located along the side track at Holeby station can be seen in figure 8.6.
78 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Figure 8.6: Cross section of the platform at Holeby located along the side track (all dimensions in [mm] if not stated differently) [9]
8.2.9 Areas Following section describes the temporary and permanent land acquisition for track upgrade purpose. The cost of expropriating areas depends on the type of area zone and its geographic location. Upgrade project will require permanent land expropriation resulting from track widening. Temporary expropriation is needed for the purpose of carrying out the construction work, material storing etc. Generally, no exact locations of temporary working areas and access roads are established.
8.2.9.1 Temporary Expropriation For the speed upgrade on the line, the temporary working roads are established on the both sides of the line along the places that require widening or displacement of the track, in rural areas. For the work in the urban area, it is assumed that the machinery can be situated on one of the tracks. The width of temporary road is estimated to 5 meters. Extra 10% of the working area is added for the purpose of earth and materials depots, and working areas along the line. Considering the length of the track section that will be widened/displaced, the total temporary working area will account for approximately 306,780 m2, with 10% supplement which account for 30,678 m2.
79 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
8.2.9.2 Permanent Expropriation Permanent expropriation is required for track widening and displacement. It is assumed that the widening the track distance requires the expropriation of the:
• approximately 4,100 m2 for track displacement in curves
• approximately 7,600 m2 for track widening
In order to compensate demand for additional area, not included in calculations, 20% of the total permanently expropriated area is added to the final amount. When summed up, the total permanent expropriation equals 14,040 m2.
8.2.10 Forestry Forestry has to be considered as an environmental aspect of the project. Lolland is known for a good quality soil and the major part of the island is covered by farmlands. Upgrading line speed to 250 km/h does not require any activities connected to preserving or grubbing forests, thus forestry is not included as a part of this project.
8.2.11 Additional Considerations Additional considerations includes areas as technical surveys (geographical, archaeological, environmental etc.) as well as measurements. The cost per kilometer is estimated basing on the cost used in Copenhagen - Ringsted project.
8.2.12 Cross-disciplinary Costs The cross-disciplinary cost covers the cost of different processes a project is undergoing. Cost is given as a percentage of the total project budget. Cross-disciplinary cost covers:
• EIA investigations
• Alignment design
• Construction management and technical inspection
• CSM and NoBo processes
• Safety approval from Danish Transport Authority
• Project follow-up
• General owner costs
Based on the experience of consultancy companies, cross-disciplinary cost accounts for 20% of the estimated construction cost.
80 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
8.2.13 Fehmarn Belt Tunnel The railway system in the tunnel includes following elements:
• Railway tracks
• Catenary system
• Signalling and control system
Railway track in the tunnel will be located in tubes, each with the width of approximately 6 m. Each tube accommodates one track constructed on the slab track. Dimensions of the railway tubes allows the train to run through the tunnel safely at the speed of 200 km/h, while keeping the pressure waves from the train within acceptable limit [27].
Technical specifications of the tunnel have to consider many other aspects of the railway, as for example aerodynamic characteristics. Technical report for Fehmarn Belt tunnel does not include railway specifications that would allow to estimate if the tunnel is capable to handle trains running with the speed of 250 km/h. However, according to Johnny Restrup-Sørensen, technical director from Femern A/S textit"In the Fehmarn Belt project all main technical specifications of the construction and the main installation of equipment (track, catenary, signalling) would support a future 250 km/h operation". Hence, it is assumed that trains could run through the Fehmarn Belt tunnel without any additional investments. However, increasing the line speed in the tunnel will generate higher maintenance cost. Track is constructed on the slab track which have high construction cost, but rather low maintenance cost, not dependent on the speed and axle load. The additional cost is assumed to account for 5% of the total yearly maintenance cost.
8.3 Summary of Project Description
The disciplines presented in this chapter will be used as a base for the cost estimation of the project.
• Track The track works include: increasing the track center distance, displacement of the curves, and relocation of the crossover. Moreover, the ballast profile for the speed 200 km/h will be adjusted in order to comply with requirements for line speed 250 km/h.
• Earth Work Earth work covers: adjustments in superstructure, drainage and embankments. Parameters as sub ballast thickness and track bed width will be increased. Large uncertainty is associated with the soil handling due to unknown geotechnical conditions.
• Bridges and Constructions In planning phase, bridges can be re-design in order to comply with regulations for 250
81 CHAPTER 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
km/h. If already existing, the 12 road bridges have to be raised and 10 rail bridges have to be widened.
• Electrification System Electrification system is already planned to be implemented on line. Increasing track center distance will require relocation of catenary masts. Location of the masts will be also changed for the relocated crossover. Moreover, the upgrade from 200 km/h to 250 km/h will require raising the overhead catenary wires in order to comply with gauge heights.
• Power Supply Higher line speed and more trains on the line will require more power supply. The cost is estimated basing on the energy needed to run Inter City trains.
• Interlocking and Remote Control Line will be equipped with ETCS level 2 system. There are no level crossing on the line.
• IT, Tele and Transmission Systems The cost of the item is omitted, as later project phases will determined the need for renewal of information system.
• Constructions Platform height and offset at the station at Nykøbing F. have to be adjusted for increased cant at the main tracks. Platforms at Holeby do not require any modifications.
• Areas Temporary expropriation is needed for the track upgrade works. Additional 10% is added to cover the depots and working areas along the line. Temporary expropriation is needed for the track displacement and widening.
• Forestry Forestry is not considered in the project.
• Additional Considerations Additional considerations concern technical surveys and measurements. The cost is based on the prices used in Copenhagen - Ringsted project.
• Cross-disciplinary Costs Cross disciplinary costs accounts for 20% of the total construction cost and cover the cost of different processes the project is undergoing.
Track design in the tunnel does not require any additional works in order to increase the speed from 200 km/h up to 250 km/h, thus Fehmarn Belt tunnel is omitted in the cost estimation.
82 9 Project Evaluation and Budgeting 9.1 Construction Cost
The construction cost is evaluated for the project of upgrading the speed on the line section between Nykøbing Falster and Puttgarden. Base for the financing will be the description of the 12 disciplines. The budgeting will be made for two options:
1. Upgrade project will be carried out for already constructed line
2. Adjustments made for speed upgrade will be implemented in the project during its planning phase.
The cost evaluation for each of the options can be seen in Appendix H. Cost estimation for 1st option includes many activities connected to rebuilding already existing line, which generates great cost, as for example moving the track or replacing track superstructure. The 2nd option considers only the cost of additional materials used in the construction of line with the designed speed of 250 km/h. In both cases the total construction cost is supplemented with the buffer that accounts for 50% of the total construction cost. The total budget estimated for the upgrade project can be seen in table 9.1.
Table 9.1: Estimation of the construction cost for two considered upgrade options Estimated construction cost Option 1 - Upgrade of the 658,420,765 DKK already existing line Option 2 - Upgrade of the 142,789,813 DKK line in the planning phase
9.2 Unit Prices
Prices for particular work or materials are based on the price catalog delivered by the consulting company Atkins.
Prices that could not be found in a price catalog are based on the cost used in other railway projects.
83 CHAPTER 9. PROJECT EVALUATION AND BUDGETING
9.3 Financial and Socio-Economic Profitability
Part of the financial and economic analysis of the project is based on the report Cost–benefit analysis of The Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link conducted by Incentive for the Danish Ministry of Transport. Analysis is made for an option where the speed upgrade is implemented in the planning phase and additional cost is calculated for modifications that would be required in order prepare the line section Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden for operational speed of 250 km/h. The reason for that is that it is more likely that lower construction cost will result in positive result of analysis. If it is a case, the analysis for more expensive option can be carried out.
The analysis is made only for passenger rail traffic across Fehmarnbelt tunnel, considering ICE trains only, as these are the ones that will be influenced by speed upgrade on line.
9.4 Cost Benefit Analysis
Cost benefit analysis (CBA) compares cost and benefits of the project measured in a same scale, which is monetary unit. Investment criteria calculated from CBA are used as a base for evaluation of project profitability.
CBA conducted in this project is simplified analysis, based on marginal costs and benefits. Output from the CBA will allow to evaluate if more thorough analysis of the project should be carried out. Methodology and description of CBA conducting for the upgrade project is presented in Appendix I.
9.4.1 Benefits When considering Inter City trains, the major benefit for upgrade up to 250 km/h is decrease in travel time. Implementation of the solution presented in the upgrade project would decrease the travel time by approximately 3 minutes on almost 60 km track section. Decrease of 3 minutes would also cause the lower operational cost and reduce negative environmental impacts.
Overall, project will shift the traffic from Great Belt, thus the route for trains will be shortened by around 160 km/h, returning benefits for climate and environment. On the other side, the number of trains will increase and new emissions will appear. However, considering the fact that ferry service will decrease significantly, it can be assumed that Fehmarn Belt fixed link will be rather beneficial for environment and climate.
Fehmarn Belt tunnel will make it easier to travel between central Europe and Scandinavian countries. The number of travellers going thought the fixed link may increase and cause the benefits for tourist sector and areas around the tunnel. Fehmarn Belt tunnel is a super structure that will be also attraction itself and will attract people who want to experience travelling through the tunnel.
As only simplified version of CBA is shown in the report, passengers’ benefit is calculated only for travel time savings.
84 CHAPTER 9. PROJECT EVALUATION AND BUDGETING
9.4.2 Evaluation of the Results Summary of CBA can be found in table 9.2.
Table 9.2: Summary of cost, benefits and investment criteria of conducted CBA COSTS Construction cost -85,520,347 Operational cost -25,818,328 Maintenance -557,422,082 Total -668,760,758 BENEFITS Customer surplus 278,130,555 Scrap value 16,774,254 INVESTMENT CRITERIA NPV -373,855,949 B/C rate 0.441
Values of the investment criteria calculated from CBA are below values needed to consider project as profitable. In order to be considered beneficial, the NPV (Net Present Value) should be positive, and B/C rate (Benefit/Cost rate) shall be greater than 1. Negative results occur due to the fact that cost of construction and maintenance is much higher than customer benefit. Time gained by passengers would be only 3 minutes, while the total cost of the project reaches more than 150 millions DKK. That generates the cost of 83,657,637 DKK per 1 minute saved.
In order to check uncertainty of the solution, sensitivity analysis has been carried out considering 5 different scenarios where values of construction cost supplement and traffic growth were modified, and extra revenue from passengers attracted by the travel time savings was added. Different scenarios and their results can be seen in table 9.3.
Table 9.3: Comparison of results of different scenarios included in sensitivity analysis Scenario Base NPV B/C Construction cost Construction cost S1 -426,015,434 0.418 supplement 30% supplement 50% Traffic growth: Traffic growth 1.7% for -0.8% for 2027-2034 S2 -441,456,017 0.415 2027-2040, then 0% +1% for 2035-2047 0% for later than 2040 Revenue from passengers S3 No extra revenue -328,985,812 0.56 attracted by shorter travel time S4 S1+S2 - -423,123,725 0.422 S5 S1+S2+S3 - -306,554,825 0.58
85 CHAPTER 9. PROJECT EVALUATION AND BUDGETING
Table 9.4: Values introduced to the analysis in order to get positive evaluation of the CBA Option 1 Option 2 Construction cost without Construction cost with supplement 30% of supplement Traffic growth of 1.7% Traffic growth of 1.7% in years 2027-2040 in years 2027-2040 14,796 extra passengers 14,406 extra passengers (attracted by travel time savings) (attracted by travel time savings)
It can be seen that even combining positive aspects of all different scenarios would not give a posi- tive NPV. In all cases benefits from project are too low to surpass the costs. In order to be consider beneficial, project would have to generate great number of benefits from passengers, which in this case would be either significant traffic growth rate or great number of extra passengers attracted by travel time savings. Neither of these two options seems realistic, as traffic growth follows net price index and sudden rise in traffic growth is rather unrealistic, and 3 minutes reduction in travel time would rather be unnoticed by passengers. However, further investigation is made in order to check what parameters would have to be changed in order to get positive NPV and B/C-rate greater than 1.
Parameters that were modified in each of the options are presented in table 9.4.
Figure 9.1 shows results of implementing two options in order to get positive results.
It can be noticed that in both cases customer surplus has to be increased significantly and construction cost has to be decreased. In the first option construction cost does not include any supplement. It is not a good solution as construction cost estimated in the planning phase is associated with many uncertainties and unexpected expenses may appear in the further project phases. The budget should include supplement that will cover these additional expenses. The 2nd option includes 30% supplement in the construction cost. This percentage of supplement is provided in the 2nd phase of the project - Programme (Basis for decision) (fig. 8.1), thus it is more realistic than 1st option.
However, as can be seen in figure 9.1 in order to compensate costs, the number of extra passengers attracted by 3 minutes reduction of travel time would be very high. Almost 15,000 passengers attracted by a possibility of saving 3 minutes of travel time does not seem realistic.
86 CHAPTER 9. PROJECT EVALUATION AND BUDGETING
Figure 9.1: Comparison of the results for 2 additional options
9.4.3 Socio-economic analysis for the construction cost estimated for upgrading already existing line
While analyzing the upgrade project for the line that is not constructed yet, it can be considered if it is worth to invest more now in order to obtain higher speed, or to wait and come back to the upgrade project when the need for higher speed arise. It is difficult to predict the size of the investment that would have to be made in the future. However, it can be discussed that the total investment cost will be probably higher in the future than now, due to the inflation and changes in regulations that may be introduced in the future.
Conducting CBA for the option where construction cost is calculated for modifications introduced during the planning phase in order to increase the line speed up to 250 km/h returned negative results. The cost of upgrading already existing line is almost 5 times higher than cost included in the CBA, therefore it can be assumed that socio-benefit analysis based on the 5 times higher investment cost would be considered not profitable as well.
87 CHAPTER 9. PROJECT EVALUATION AND BUDGETING
9.4.4 Summary of Financial and Socio-Economic Profitability First initial socio-economic analysis showed that in general project is not considered beneficial. It is due to the high construction and maintenance cost compared to benefits gained from speed upgrade.
Different scenarios included in sensitivity analysis did not give a positive results neither. Costs still surpass benefits significantly. The further investigation revealed that in order to obtain positive NPV and B/C rate greater than 1, the number of extra passengers attracted by speed upgrade and time savings shall be around 15,000. It is doubtful that 3 minutes reduction in travel time will have such great impact on number of passengers. In general, great costs associated with project lead to negative CBA results, thus project is considered as not profitable.
Analysis could be extended by other factors, that would influence the result, as for example GDP development and external impacts. Even though the CBA showed that project is not beneficial, further investigations should be made, for instance taking into an account upgrade of the longer track section, so the costs and benefits would be distributed more evenly at longer track section.
9.5 Risk Plan
Uncertainties associated with a cost estimate for project are generally included in a risk plan, which is organized in accordance with New Budgeting. The upgrade project for Nykobing F. - Puttgarden does not include actual risk plan. Instead all uncertainties connected to the cost estimate that appeared throughout project description are listed. Furthermore, the level of hazard connected to risk is stated. For instance, hazards related to Earth work will account for largest project risks. It is due to the poor quality of estimation, but also due to the lack of information of the geo-technical conditions at the track section. Project description is based on an assumption that base line complies with all valid requirements, and actions associated with handling contaminated soil are omitted.
Great uncertainty associated with cost evaluation for introducing modifications for line speed 250 km/h in the planning phase occurs as well. Cost is calculated only for extra materials, without including additional planning, measurements and studies. Also big hazard appears for evalua- tion of permanent expropriation of areas, due to lack of information and experience within the field.
Output from the risk analysis can be used as a base for decision about additional supplement to the cost estimate. Hazards associated to the cost estimation are listed in Appendix J.
88 CHAPTER 9. PROJECT EVALUATION AND BUDGETING
9.6 Project Summary
Project to upgrade speed on the track section between Nykøbing Falser and Puttgarden consisted on three main parts:
1. Proposition of the design for track alignment for line speed of 250 km/g
2. Capacity analysis
3. Socio-economic analysis
Proposition presented for track alignment for line speed 250 km/h allows the train to run with the maximum line speed on the 97% of the track section between Nykøbing Falster and Puttgarden. Speed restriction on the rest of the track is due to the Nykøbing F. station design and small radius of the curve on the bridge at the Guldborg Sund. Track alignment at those elements was not changed due to the large cost that would be generated, but also because of complexity and lack of technical knowledge in the fields. However, that would be recommended to look further into the issue as the speed restriction causes increase in travel time and influence capacity on the line. Changes in track geometry led to reduction of travel time for Inter City trains by 3 minutes. It does not seem like a significant change but it was obtained on the track section of the length of 57,424 km. If other section of the fixed link would be upgraded to 250 km/h as well, the travel time may drop significantly.
Capacity analysis has been made for line speed 200 km/h and 250 km/h, and results were compared. Analysis revealed that capacity utilization is slightly higher for line speed 250 km/h than it is for line speed of 200 km/h. It is caused by unused capacity at the 250 km/h alternative, as Inter City trains run faster, but maximum speed for freight trains remains the same. Even though the capacity utilization is higher for upgrade project, the unused capacity can be utilized in the future, when the traffic demand increases and more trains will be accommodated in the timetable. Simulation of the timetable did not show any delays occurring in the network. It is due to the fact that real timetable for this track section does not exist yet and the timetable used in the analysis was based on traffic assumptions and created in a way that avoids conflicts and trains overtaking. Analysis of a timetable that takes into an account real departure times from Copenhagen or Hamburg could reveal delays occurring in the network, but this kind of network is very complex and difficult to model. However, there is a possibility that faster running ICE trains would improve robustness and reliability of the timetable.
Socio- economic analysis was based on cost-benefit analysis. Cost of the project is very high when compared to the benefits, thus the results show that project is not profitable from socio- economic point of view. However, analysis is basic and can be expanded by more parameters that could influence the output (if the project was considered to be worth to proceed with further investigation). Also, uncertainties associated with the cost estimate may lead to wrong evaluation of the socio-economic impacts. The wider scope could be analyzed, for example for the whole fixed link, from Ringsted to Puttgarden, as a prolongation of high speed line Copenhagen - Ringsted.
89 CHAPTER 9. PROJECT EVALUATION AND BUDGETING
9.7 Discussion and Recommendations
When looking at the analyses made in the project in order to investigate the potential of the speed upgrade on line Nykøbing F. - Puttgarden it can be assumed that project shall not be proceeded. However, it is worth to further investigate the possibility of preparing the line for high speed.
First of all, Fehmarnbelt fixed link is a part of Scandinavian-Mediterranean TEN-T corridor, with an objectives of faster travels, and safer and less congested routes stated by European Commission. Construction of high speed line from Stockholm to Malmo, planned for design speed of 250 km/h - 320 km/h, is about to start in a near future. High speed line from Copenhagen to Ringsted is expected to open in December 2018. Upgrading the line speed on a line track from Ringsted to Puttgarden would be "natural" prolongation of the high speed line, especially considering the fact that Fehmarn Belt tunnel will be built with possibility of travelling 250 km/h. If German side decided to prepare line for higher speed as well, the high speed line connecting Stockholm and Hamburg would be created. Just building the high speed line in Sweden will result in travel time of 5.5 hours between Stockholm and Hamburg, and may create competition for a flight connections that take around 1 h 35 min. Travel time by airplane is still 3 hours shorter, but it has to be taken into an account that taking a plane requires extra at-the-airport time. Moreover, airports are usually located outside of the cities, while railway stations are placed in a city centers, thus transfer time to the city is not required. If other track sections of the fixed link were upgraded to the high speed, the travel time between Stockholm and Hamburg would create a serious competition for other means of transportation.
Furthermore, The European Commission developed TEN-T network to achieve interoperable, international, high speed railway and strives to achieve this goal. If high speed railway is not a common policy now, it may be implemented in the future. It can be argued that it is better to invest more now in order to avoid upgrading line in the future, when the construction cost of upgrading existing line will be much higher.
Even though analysis of Nykobing F. - Puttgarden upgrade project does not return positive results, it should be the subject of further considerations and investigations. The more thorough study could include:
• Proposition of changes of alignment at the Nykobing F. station and Gulborgsund bridge, in order to create smoother speed profile
• Analysis of the capacity utilization for the whole fixed link, or even further for Copenhagen - Hamburg section by using realistic timetable. Investigation of delays, and timetable robustness and reliability
• Socio-benefit analysis for the whole fixed link for the line speed of 250 km/h
• Expansion of CBA, by for instance including more parameters, or by conducting supple- mentary analysis, as for example MCDA (Multi Criteria Decision Analysis)
90 CHAPTER 9. PROJECT EVALUATION AND BUDGETING
Besides of that, project could be expanded by investigating the possibility of running tilting trains on line. Regulations for tilting trains are not as strict as for conventional trains, thus it could be possible to run trains faster with lower investment cost. It is not common in Denmark to use tilting trains, but this type of trains is used in Sweden. Studies of potential of running tilting trains on line would be significant in case when Swedish operator would decide to enter danish market, for example to run trains between Stockholm and Hamburg.
Summarizing, even though the investigation of the possibility of upgrading railway line between Nykøbing Falster and Puttgarden up to 250 km/h returned negative results, the project shall be proceeded with more detailed investigations as a step to fulfill European goals and as a way to invest in the future.
91 Bibliography
[1] Banedanmark, Ringsted–Fehmarn: The railway connecting Europe.
[2] Banedanmark, URL: uk.bane.dk , April 2017.
[3] Banedanmark, Banenorm BN1-6-6: Tværptofiler for ballasteret spor, April 2016.
[4] Banedanmark, Banenorm BN1-9-2: Sikkerheds- og opholdszoner på perroner, March 2012.
[5] Banedanmark, Banenorm BN1-154-2: Sporafstand og frispormærker, March 2008.
[6] Banedanmark, Banenotat, ny anlægsbudgettering på baneområdet, Version 2 af 1.december 2010.
[7] Banedanmark (Presented by Technical Director Klaus S. Jørgensen), Concept for regional traffic in Denmark; 23. Dialogforum Feste Fehmarnbeltquerung, December 2016.
[8] Banedanmark, E3002 Rail Bridges Lolland-Falster; 1.2 Introduction - PRELIMENARY, Ringsted - Fehmarn, April 2014.
[9] Banedanmark, Plans and materials obtained from Rail Net Denmark for thesis purpose, February 2017.
[10] Banedanmark (Presented by Project Director Jens Ole Kaslund), Status on Upgrading of the Fehmarn Railway, June 2016.
[11] Banedanmark, Track engineering rules, May 2017.
[12] Boysen, Hans E., Øresund and Fehmarnbelt high-capacity rail corridor standards up- dated, URR: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210970614000419 Journal of Rail Transport Planning & Management (pages 44-58), Volume 4, Issue 3, December 2014.
[13] COWI A/S, Market study: Improved train service Øresund-Hamburg, May 2014.
[14] Danish Transport Authority: Hans Chr. Wolter, The Rail Freight Corridor through Denmark; Formative Years and Future Perspectives for Customers, May, 2015.
[15] Danish Transport Authority, Trafikplan for den statslige jernbane 2012-2027; Høringsudgave, October, 2012.
[16] DSB Infrastruktur, Fritrumsprofiler,
[17] Dynesen, Claus - Projektdirektør, Den tyske godkendelse af Femern Bælt-tunnelen på sporet, Den Danske Banekonference 15. maj 2017. May 1995.
[18] Esveld, Coenraad, Modern Railway Track: Second Edition, Delft University of Technology, 2001.
92 Bibliography
[19] European Commission, White paper: European transport policy for 2010 URL: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV:l24007, European Union, 2001.
[20] European Commission, White Paper on transport, European Union, 2011.
[21] European Commission, URL: ec.europa.eu, April 2017.
[22] European Commission, Technical Specifications for Interoperability, European Union Agency for Railways, 2014.
[23] European Commission, ETCS Driver Machine Interface; p.47, European Union Agency for Railways, 2016.
[24] European Railway Agency, ERTMS Unit; Introduction to ETCS braking curves, version 1.4, June 2016.
[25] Femern A/S, URL: femern.com/en , 2017.
[26] Femern A/S, Financial analysis of the Fehmarnbelt Fixed Link including Danish landworks, February 2016.
[27] Femern A/S, Consolidated Technical Report, Draft, December 2011.
[28] Gade, Jørgen (Atkins), Presentation: Traction Power Supply - Operation and sectionizing; Earthing and auxiliary systems, Academic course at DTU: Railway Design and Maintenance, March 2016.
[29] Karlsson, Henrik, Ramboll Signalling System, Academic course at DTU: Signalling Systems and Technology for Railways, September 2015.
[30] Nedergaard, Mads, Ringsted-Fehmarn Railway: Slope Stability of Embankments, NIRAS, Allerød, Denmark, 2015.
[31] Sweco (former Grontmij), Hastighedsopgradering Ringsted-Odense - Projekteringsgrundlag, Technical report (translated from danish by Rie Jensen and Mai-Britt Rasmussen in the thesis from June 2015: "Upgrade of Regional Railway Lines - An investigation of integrating Lille Syd in the TEN corridor"), Grontmij A/S, Glostrup, 2015.
[32] Hunyadi Bertil, Capacity evaluation for ERTMS (European Rail Traffic Management System) Level 2 operation on HS2, Bombardier Transportation, Rail Control Solutions, October 2011.
[33] International Union of Railways, UIC Code 406, 1st edition, June 2004.
[34] Landex, Alex, PhD thesis Methods to estimate railway capacity and passenger delays, November, 2008.
[35] Landex 2014 (Available through the academic course at DTU), Chater 6: Determination of Headways, 2014.
93 Bibliography
[36] Landex 2014 (Available through the academic course at DTU), Chater 4: Timetabling, 2014.
[37] Ministry of Transport, The Danish Transport System: Facts and Figures, Danish Presidency of the Council of the European Union, 2012.
[38] Nielsen, Bo (Banedanmark), Presentation: Track alignment design, Academic course at DTU: Railway Design and Maintenance, February 2016.
[39] Nielsen, Bo (Banedanmark), Presentation: Cross section, Structure gauge & Platforms, Academic course at DTU: Railway Design and Maintenance, February 2016.
[40] rmcon, Rail Management Consultants, URL: www.rmcon.de/railsys-en/workflow/, July, 2017.
[41] rmcon, Rail Management Consultants, Manual, RailSys, Version 10, July, 2017.
[42] Schittenhelm, Bernd, Rail Net Denmark, Individual interview, May, 2017.
[43] Schittenhelm Bernd (Proceedings from the Annual Transport Conference at Aalborg University), Planning With Timetable Supplements in Railway Timetables, DTU Transport – Department for transport & Rail Net Denmark, 2011.
[44] Sniady, Aleksander & Soler, Jose European Train Control System (ETCS), Academic course at DTU: Signalling Systems and Technology for Railways, October 2015.
[45] The Danish Government, Sustainable transport – better infrastructure, December 2008.
[46] The Danish Ministry of Transport, Cost - benefit analysis of The Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link, Incentive, Report, January 2015.
[47] Wolter, Hans Chr., Presentation at the BaneBranchen: The Rail Freight Corridor through Denmark: Formative Years and Future Perspectives for Customers, Danish Transport Authority, May 2015.
94