Department of Ciil and Sajry Engineering, Ft 4, 1959 Certified By
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE FEASIBILITY OF MONQRAILS I 1· J .. by . i ~.., 3 .. · ERMANN STEFFEN DIECMANN BOTZOW. JR. B. S., Pri-ceton University (1958) SIJBMIZD IN PARTIAL FULFITILENT OF TEE REQUIMEMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF ECHNOLOGY September 1959 Jl a . A Signature of Author , _ . ,,_, _ _,, ,,, Department of Ciil and SaJry Engineering, ft 4, 1959 Certified by Y Thdis Supervisor · pt_~ J=, Accepted by Chairman,Departpnta ;comrmitte,&iq duate Students THE FEASIBILITY OF MONORAILS by HERMANN STEFFEN DIEC1KMANN BOTZOW, JR. Submitted to the Department of Civil and Sanitary Engineering on August 24, 1959 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering. ABSTRACT The first monorail was built in 1821. Since that date the possible applications of one-track railroads have inspired many proposals throughout the world. Several lines have been built for both passenger and freight purposes. This thesis compares the physical and technical limitations of several types of monorail to presentday conventional transit in order to establish the feasibility of these monorails as a solution to modern transit needs. -Also mentioned are other applications of monorail such as one finds in industry. Thesis Supervisor: Albert S. Lang Assistant Professor of Transportation Engineering ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author can not adequately thank Professor Lang whose patient help and advice made this thesis possibleo Special acknowledgment is also due Mr. W. C. Wheeler of St. Louis Car Company whose detailed information on monorail cars proved ex- tremely valuable. Nor could the vast quantity of references have been found without the assistance of a list made especially for this thesis by Mr. C. E. R. Sherrington of the British Transport Commission. Final thanks go to Miss Terry Di Prizio for her careful typing of the manuscript. iii SUMMARY A limited amount of literature is available on monorail. Much of the American and British literature is contained in the biblio- graphy of this thesis. Of this literature, only a small percentage contains information useful for comparing monorail and conventional transit in regard to physical and technical limitations. The rest offers information of historical and other interest and can be contained in two appendices entitled CONSTRUCTED MONORAILS and PROPOSED MONORAILSo Monorail today includes two suspended methods using one and two rails respectively. Also important is a supported monorail which overrides a beamway. The first and third types have been built in the past. Presumably, the second type can be built. Comparison of these monorail types to conventional transit shows that the desired transit application determines the best alternative. That is, the first or second monorail types may be better for a downtown elevated construction because they are quieter, block less light from the street and use less right-of-way. However, conven- tional transit may be better for city-to-suburb lines where surface right-of-way is readily available. Many characteristics are shared by monorail and conventional -transit. The use of pneumatic-tired trucks as on the Paris Metro is one of these. Another could be the use of similar signal and control systems. The preponderance of these physical and technical limitations shows that at the present, convention rapid transit is better developed than monorail. Should monorail be further developed, then iv the advantages offered by suspended systems will put monorail in a more favorable light. Again, this depends on the contemplated application. Presently, the supported monorail is the least favored alternative be- cause it needs a comparatively massive track and support system. The type of guide wheel system it uses negates the possibility of decreasing the size of the track. Constructing a prototype monorail that allows testing of loaded, full-size trains operating at intended design speeds requires a great deal of money. The author believes this is the largest difficulty now facing promoters of present day monorail. Parties interested in a Seattle monorail proposal include Lockheed Aircraft Corporation and St. Louis Car Company, both of whom may desire to finance a prototype monorail installation. Alternative solutions to both monorail and conventional transit offer fewer advantages. Nor are they as developed as monorail and con- ventional transit. The industrial applications of monorail are extremely successful. While there is no modern monorail line or system serving public transit needs, it is expected that such a line or system is feasible in the future. V TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT.......................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................... ii SUMMARY. .........................................................iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................. ....................v PART I - INTRODUCTION .. ..... ..... ....................... 1 PURPOSE ..................... ............................. 2 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION..... ............................. 2 Letters............... ............................. 2 Bibliography........... ............................. 2 SCOPE....................... ........... ..... 3 Thesis................. ........... e - . 3e Appendices I and II.... ...... 4 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ........................................ 5 First Monorail...... ................................ 5 Successful Pre-World War II Monorails. .. .. .. 5 Monorail After World War II.......... .................. 6 DEFINITION ................................. 7 Monorail.............................. ........... 7 Conventional Transit.................. ........... 7 MONORAIL TYPES ......... ................... ... ................8 Suspended Monorail ...... 8...............................8 Supported Monorail ...................................... 8 PART II - REQUIREMENTS AND BASIC CHARACTERISTICS ................. 11 CARS......................................................... 12 Weight to Passenger Ratio.............................. 12 Car Construction........................................ 12 Hangers.............. .. .. .................. ........ 13 Coupling................................................ 13 Weight Per Running Foot ............. .............. 14 Car Shape .......................................... 15 Air Effects................................ .............16 Truck Assemblies....................................... 16 Guide Wheels.................. .................... 17 Motors.................................................. 18 Alternating Current .................................... 19 Direct Current ........................................ 19 Contact Systems ....................................... 20 Research and Development ................................ 20 vi TRACK ... ................................................... 21 Description .......................................... 21 Design Requirements..... ............................. 22 Special Considerations... ............................. 23 Necessary Tests.......... ............................. 23 SWITCHES....................... 24 Description.............. ............................. 24 ThrowTime............... ............................. 24 Limitations.............. ............................. 25 SUPPORTING STRUCTURE............ ............................. 26 Description............. ............................. 26 Design Requirements. .... ............................. 26 Size of Column Bases..... ............................. 27 FOUNDATIONS.................................................. 28 LOCATION ......................................... .. 29 Alignment ................................. ........ 29 LandUse............................. ........ 29 Aesthetic Considerations ................ ........ 30 Use In Subways, On Bridges and Elsewhere.. ........ 30 Clearances. ............................... 31 CONSTRUCTION................................................ 31 OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS.. .................................. 32 Speed............... .............. .................... 32 Capacity......... .................... 34 Energy Use ......... .. .. .................... 35 . .. .. Labor Requirements.. .................... 35 Safety ............. .. .. .................... 36 General Stability... .. .. .. .................... 36 Sidesway............ .. .. .................. 37 Noise............. ...................40 Maintenance ......... .................... 41 ECONOMICS............................... .................... 42 First Cost........................ .................... 42 Cost of Maintenance and Operation. .................... 44 Comparison To The Automobile...... .................... 45 FURTHER STUDY .................. ........................ 45 PART III - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS .......................... 47 STATIONS..................................................... 48 Location. ............................................. 48 Facilities .......................................48 Platform Clearances ................................... 49 Passenger Safety.............................. 50 YARD FACILITIES . ......... ....................................52 SIGNAL AND CONTROL SYSTEMS. ..................................52 vii POWERSUPPLY SY .......................................ST E M S 54 PART IV - ADDITIONAL CHARACTERISTICSAND APPLICATIONS............56 ADDITIONAL CHARACTERISTICS