A New European Rapid Railway Line in Sicily

Faculty of Civil and Industrial Engineering

Department of Civil Constructional and Environmental Engineering

Master’s degree in Transport Systems Engineering

Supervisor: Candidate: Prof. Stefano Ricci Atieh KianiNejadOshah 1734077 Co-Supervisor: Ing. Pierangelo Rivoli

A.A 2017-2018

Contents List of Figures: ...... 5 List of Tables: ...... 8 Acronyms ...... 9 Acknowledgments ...... 10 1 Abstract ...... 11 2 Introduction and purpose of the research ...... 12 2.1.1 Main constraints of the existing line: ...... 14 2.1.2 Objective: Improvement of Railway Accessibility in Palermo-Catania ...... 16 3 General review of Capacity Methodologies ...... 20 3.1 Synthetic Method: ...... 22 3.1.1 UIC’s Compression Method – LEAFLET 406: ...... 22 3.1.2 Calculation of Capacity Consumption ...... 32 3.2 Analytical Method ...... 33 3.2.1 UIC's analytical method-leaflet 405R ...... 34 3.3 Analogical Method ...... 36 3.4 Result of Analysed Capacity Calculation Methods: ...... 36 3.4.1 Combined Analytical- Analogical Approach ...... 37 3.4.2 Future Development: Utilization of UIC’s Leaflet 406 for Calculation Capacity ...... 38 4 Analysed Scenarios ...... 38 4.1 Existing scenario ...... 38 4.1.1 Overview of The Sicilian Network ...... 38 4.1.2 Existing Line Characteristic ...... 39 4.1.3 Existing Operation Plan ...... 44 4.1.4 Existing Rolling Stock...... 44 4.1.5 Existing Travel Time ...... 46 4.1.6 Existing Line Capacity ...... 48

4.2 Corridor D1-(SABIR): Doubling of The Existing Line in The Fiumetorto – Bicocca ...... 52 4.2.1 Functional Analysis of Corridor D1 ...... 53 4.2.2 Results of Corridor D1 ...... 59

2 4.3 Corridor A: Double Track Castelbuono-Pollina-Catenanuova ...... 60 4.3.1 Functional Analysis of doubling Castelbuono-Pollina ...... 60 4.3.2 Result of Corridor A: ...... 61 4.4 Corridor B: Double Track Castelbuono-Pollina- New Enna ...... 65 4.4.1 Functional Analysis of Corridor B ...... 65 4.4.2 Results of Corridor B ...... 66 4.5 Corridor C-(Highway): Double Track Enna-Fiumetorto ...... 68 4.5.1 Functional Analysis of Corridor C: ...... 68 4.5.2 Result of Corridor C ...... 69

4.6 Scenario D2 -(Future Corridor): Existing Line Upgrade+ New Rapid Single Track ...... 70 4.6.1 Future Line Characteristic ...... 72 4.6.2 Future Operating Model ...... 83 4.6.3 Future Rolling Stock ...... 86 4.6.4 Future Travel Times ...... 87 4.6.5 Future Capacity ...... 90 5 Evaluation of scenarios through AHP method-Expert choice Software and Cost-Benefit Analysis: 95 5.1 Implementation of the AHP Methodology...... 97 5.1.1 Computing the vector of criteria weights ...... 97 5.1.2 Computing the matrix of option scores ...... 98 5.1.3 Ranking the options ...... 99 5.1.4 Checking the consistency ...... 99 5.1.5 Automating the pairwise comparisons ...... 100 5.1.6 Implementation of AHP method for selection of optimal scenarios in the Sicilian network: ...... 101 5.2 Result of analysed Corridors (D1, A, B, C, D2) ...... 101 6 Operation Methodology and Opentrack® Software ...... 106 6.1 Input data: ...... 108 6.1.1 Rolling Stock: ...... 108 6.1.2 Infrastructural Data ...... 115 6.1.3 Timetable ...... 120

3 6.2 Simulation...... 120 6.3 Output Data: ...... 121 6.3.1 Result of Simulated Options by Opentrack® ...... 122 7 Results ...... 130 8 Conclusions ...... 131 9 Bibliography ...... 132

4 List of Figures: Figure 1:Timetable for the master thesis during a period of 11 months ...... 11 Figure 2: European high speed corridor n.5 ...... 12 Figure 3: local network ...... 13 Figure 4: TEN-T core network corridors. corridor n°5 Helsinki-La Valletta ...... 14 Figure 5: Comparison means of transport (Minuetto train and bus services) ...... 15 Figure 6:Node Catania-Integration of the modes of air and rail transport to the airport of Catania Fontanarossa ...... 17 Figure 7:Estimate of the variation of the resident population in 2030 by municipality ...... 18 Figure 8: Timeline of implementation of the line for functional expansions ...... 19 Figure 9: New single track interconnected to existing line (RFI, "Enhancement and redevelopment of the railway Messina-Catania- Palermo Itinerary", 2017) ...... 20 Figure 10:Parameters in railway capacity ...... 21 Figure 11: The schematization of methods for calculation line capacity ...... 22 Figure 12:The Balance of Railway Capacity by UIC CODE 406R ...... 23 Figure 13:Fast train catching up with a slower train ...... 24 Figure 14:Heterogeneous (a) and homogeneous (b) timetable ...... 25 Figure 15:Minimum headway time according to the speed of the train ...... 27 Figure 16:The fast train (train 3) must reduce the speed due to conflicts ...... 27 Figure 17:The coherence between punctuality and capacity utilization...... 28 Figure 18:Workflow of the UIC 406 method...... 29 Figure 19: UIC 406, normal uncompressed timetable (Armstrong, 2011) ...... 30 Figure 20: UIC 406- compressed timetable (Armstrong, 2011) ...... 30 Figure 21:Elements of the block occupation time (Kaas, 1998) ...... 32 Figure 22: Determination of capacity consumption (Italferr P. P., Introduction to railway project) .... 33 Figure 23: The capacity of a section expressed in number of trains in period T (Italferr P. P., Introduction to railway project) ...... 34 Figure 24: Basic diagram of combined analytical–simulation approach for capacity analysis ...... 37 Figure 25:Rail network existing Sicily ...... 39 Figure 26:Functional Layout of Fiumetorto-Catenanuova-Existing Scenario (1/3) ...... 41 Figure 27:Operation Plan on Fiumetorto-Catenanuova. Existing Scenario ...... 46 Figure 28: Train running simulation-Speed/distance diagram fast regional service Palermo-Catania, and vertical alignment of the line- Existing scenario (IF-SIM) ...... 48 Figure 29: Calculation capacity on the single track between Fiumetorto-Catenanuova ...... 49 Figure 30:Variants Infrastructure Corridors...... 51 Figure 31:Functional scheme of the alternative relating to the redevelopment of the historic line..... 52 Figure 32:Speeding Existing Track Studio SABIR "Strategic Project" ...... 54 Figure 33: Profile of interaction between the progressive, tunnels and the radii of curvature of the line ...... 55

5 Figure 34: Max speed values 90 km/h with Rank B ...... 55 Figure 35: Max speed value 100 km/h with Rank B ...... 56 Figure 36:Assumptions phases realization "Strategic Project" ...... 58 Figure 37:Corridor A Castelbuono-Pollina-Catenanuova...... 60 Figure 38:Profile and planimetry of corridor A ...... 61 Figure 39:Corridor A- extension of civil works ...... 62 Figure 40:Occupation graph of the new Palermo-Catania from 6 to 10 ...... 64 Figure 41:Layout of Functional Corridors Castelbuono-Pollina-New Enna ...... 65 Figure 42:Corridor B Connection of Castelbuono-Pollina-New Enna ...... 67 Figure 43:Corridor B- Extension of Civil Works ...... 67 Figure 44:Layout of functional highway corridor ...... 68 Figure 45:Assumptions Phases Realization ...... 69 Figure 46:Timeline of implementation of the line for functional expansions ...... 72 Figure 47:Length of stations ...... 74 Figure 48:Single-line diagram Palermo- Catania. 1st functional phase ...... 75 Figure 49: Single-line diagram. Timing of Crossover Posts for Freight services on the new fast line .... 80 Figure 50: The cadence of crossing places for passenger services on the new fast line ...... 82 Figure 51: Future line train services...... 84 Figure 52: New line train services ...... 85 Figure 53: Existing line train services ...... 86 Figure 54:Train running simulation- Speed/distance diagram fast regional Service Palermo-Catania in existing line. Stops at Termini Imerese, Caltanissetta X, and Enna- Vertical alignment of the line ...... 87 Figure 55: Train running simulation- Speed/distance diagram for Intercity Service Palermo- Catania as future scenario. Stop in Enna- Vertical alignment of the line ...... 88 Figure 56:Train running simulation- Speed/distance diagram for the Palermo-Catania Regional Fast Service for the future scenario. Stops at Termini Imerese, Caltanissetta X. and Enna- Vertical alignment of the line ...... 89 Figure 57: Capacity calculation of single track between Fiumetorto and Catenanuova. Single interoperable rail ...... 91 Figure 58:Graphic timetable Fiumetorto – Catenanuova ...... 93 Figure 59:Selection Methodology ...... 94 Figure 60:AHP Phases ...... 95 Figure 61:Rational Decision-Making Process ...... 96 Figure 62:Dynamic Sensitivity for nodes, Goal: Selection of the best corridor ...... 102 Figure 63:Performance Sensitivity for nodes ...... 102 Figure 64:Gradient Sensitivity for nodes ...... 103 Figure 65:Two-Dimensional Sensitivity for nodes ...... 103 Figure 66:Cost-Benefit Analysis ...... 104 Figure 67:Schematization of the analysis methodology Phases ...... 106

6 Figure 68:Iterative process to optimize the system as a whole ...... 107 Figure 69: The modules of simulation by Opentrack® ...... 107 Figure 70:Future operation model of Palermo-Catania ...... 110 Figure 71:IF-SIM simulated speed/distance diagram- Vertical alignment of the line ...... 111 Figure 72:Traction Effort ...... 112 Figure 73:IF-SIM simulated speed/distance diagram- Vertical alignment of the line ...... 113 Figure 74:Traction effort ...... 113 Figure 75:Train running simulation- Speed/distance diagram- Vertical alignment of the line ...... 114 Figure 76:Traction effort ...... 115 Figure 77:Speed of train Fiumetorto-Catenanuova even direction ...... 117 Figure 78:Modification of speed Fimetorto-Catenanuova even direction ...... 117 Figure 79:Speed of Fiumetorto-Catenanuova odd direction ...... 118 Figure 80: Simulation animation of the new line with Opentrack® software ...... 121 Figure 81:Train graph, Simulated and planned path ...... 122 Figure 82:reference timetable ...... 123 Figure 83: reference occupation time ...... 124 Figure 84: timetable option 1 ...... 125 Figure 85: timetable option 1 with one freight train ...... 125 Figure 86: timetable option 2 ...... 126 Figure 87: Occupation time option 2 ...... 127 Figure 88: Timetable option 3 ...... 127 Figure 89: Train graph planned and simulated paths in option 3 ...... 128 Figure 90: Train graph option 4 ...... 129 Figure 91: Timetable during an accident ...... 129

7 List of Tables: Table 1: Comparison of train and bus ...... 15 Table 2: comparison of existing and future technical specification ...... 16 Table 3: Future and existing, characteristic of the line ...... 17 Table 4: Functional characteristics of the route’s intervention object-Existing Scenario ...... 40 Table 5: Operating Plan on Fiumetorto-Catenanuova. Existing Scenario ...... 44 Table 6: Existing circulating from Plaermo to Catania, and Catania to Catenanuova ...... 45 Table 7: Existing circulating Palermo-Agrigento ...... 45 Table 8: Existing circulating Roccapalumba-Caltanissetta ...... 46 Table 9: PIC extraction of the Regional Fast Train 3804 ...... 47 Table 10: Estimated Capacity for single track between Fiumetorto-Catenanuova. Existing Scenario .. 50 Table 11: Comparison of different Corridors ...... 51 Table 12: Travel time of scenario D1 according to various hypotheses ...... 57 Table 13: Technical Reference Standard (Italferr, Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo- Catania, 2012) ...... 62 Table 14: The travel times in minutes of fast regional services Scenario A ...... 63 Table 15: The existing travel time ...... 63 Table 16: The travel times in minutes of fast regional services Corridor B ...... 66 Table 17: The existing travel time ...... 66 Table 18: Intervention Cost...... 68 Table 19: Performance parameters for passenger traffic ...... 70 Table 20: Performance Parameters for freight traffic ...... 71 Table 21: Development phase- construction layout sections ...... 72 Table 22: Functional characteristics of functional Sections in the first functional phase. In red the planned project interventions ...... 73 Table 23: Functional characteristics of Station Scenario Before Functional Phase ...... 83 Table 24: Operating Model. Single interoperable rail ...... 84 Table 25: Summary travel times ...... 90 Table 26: Estimated Capacity for functional sections for the route to the simple binary between Fiumetorto and Catenanuova. future Scenario ...... 92 Table 27: Summary of Operating Model and capacity ...... 93 Table 28: Table of relative scores ...... 97 Table 29: Values of the Random Index (RI) for small problems ...... 100 Table 30: Comparison between the project corridors of the S.d.F ...... 101 Table 31: Cost-Benefit data ...... 104 Table 32:Total population of Palermo-Catania ...... 105 Table 33: Rolling stock E402B technical characteristics ...... 108 Table 34:Rolling stock E464 technical characteristics ...... 109 Table 35: Rolling stock E655 technical characteristics ...... 109

8 Table 36: Number and type of trains ...... 111 Table 37: Assumption of timetable ...... 115 Table 38:The infrastructure characteristic of future project ...... 116 Table 39: Number and location of the block signal and distance signal in even direction ...... 119 Table 40: The number and location of block and distance signal in an odd direction ...... 119 Table 41: Various Scenarios ...... 122 Table 42: The result table ...... 130

Acronyms

• RFI: Rete Ferroviaria Italiana S.P.A • SCMT: Sistema Controllo Marcia Treno (Train Travel Control System) • TSI: Technical Specifications for Interoperability • ERTMS: European Rail Traffic Management System • TEN-T: Trans-European Transport Network • SCC: command and control system of circulation • BAB: Regulations governing the movement spacing: Automatic Block 4 code • CTC: Centralized Traffic Control • BCA: Axle Counting Block • BA: Automatic Block • DC: Central Leadership • PIC: Platform Integrated Circulation • TUs: Transport Units • FCL: Fascicolo Linea • UIC: Union International des Chemins de Fer • ATC: Automatic Train Control • IMs: Infrastructure Manager • SSHR: Sum of Shortest Headway time Reciprocals • SAHR: Sum of Arrival Headway time Reciprocals

9 Acknowledgments I would like to express my sincere gratitude to people whom without their wise direction this thesis wouldn’t be possible.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Prof. Stefano Ricci for the continuous support of my master study and research, for his patience, motivation, enthusiasm, and immense knowledge. His guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this thesis.

Thanks to my compony tutor Eng. Pierangelo Rivoli for selecting me and giving me the opportunity to develop my research in the ITF. It was a very pleasant experience the time of my student life shared with the ITF research team, thank you for your friendship and good work atmosphere. Special mention to all the Ricci people for their collaboration not only in the academic side but the personal dimension. Thanks to Alberto Vitali, Emma Castiello, Silvia Nardomi, Stefania and Piero for their support in hard times and sharing their knowledge. Big memories will remain with me of the relaxing moments shared in the coffee breaks with Anna, Marttina, Alessio, Mariarosa, Andrea, Paolo, Alessandro and Alessandro. I also acknowledge the willingness of the ITF staff to help when problems or issues appeared., I greatly look forward to having all of you as colleagues in near future.

I want to thank my mother for her eternally support, encouragement and her endless love.

I would like to thank all professors who have guided me in my master study and their professional suggestions specially professor Malavasi, prof. Fusco, prof. Di Mascio.

Also, Hamed Pouryousef the Autor of “Railway capacity tools and methodologies in the U.S and Europe”, Dr. Evangelia Kontaxi previous doctorate student of transportation and author of “Railway capacity handbook: A systematic approach to methodologies”, Dr. Vahid Ranjbar existing PHD student of transportation, Eros Tombesi from Trenitalia S.p.A and previous doctorate student from Sapienza. Dr. Pasi Lautala associate Professor, Civil and Environmental Engineering director, Rail Transportation program, Michigan Tech Transportation Institute.

I would like to thank my close friends who have encouraged me during these years.

10 1 Abstract The work of internship and writing thesis has done at the Department of Functional Design and Operation Italferr SpA over a period of six months for the Master in Transportation engineering of Sapienza University.

This work address to analyse the problematic issues of the Palermo-Catania existing railway line with the aim to boost the accessibility of the regional railway; from a master point of view, the comprehensive and coordinate achievement to competitiveness European transport industries and concordance with STI standard is under consideration; a unique, harmonized and generally-valid understanding of the situation is required to plan, having more frequency, punctuality, speed, and capacity focusing on the needs and benefits of the users, the economy and society regarding the rising volume of traffic, with simultaneously increasing demands in terms of quality and quantity;

Regarding to infrastructural problem of the existing line, five corridors alternatives have analyzed by AHP method and the optimal solution is leading to the building of new rapid routes interconnected to existing line, with the added benefits of maintaining the existing line, the satisfaction of residence by using the same stations, having more stations consequently more approachability, due to limited funds at the disposal local government, multi-annual contract for construction in five phases subsequently taking immediate advantage of constructed phase are transcendence of selected scenario.

In the following the Opentrack® software is engaged in the planning and design phase of project verification, ultimately, the train performance of whole simulated path faithfully reproduces the planned path. Figure 1 shows the thesis activities for 11 months.

30-07-1818-09-1807-11-1827-12-1815-02-1906-04-1926-05-1915-07-1903-09-19

Introduction constraints and objective of the research

Operation Methodology: Opentrack® software

General review of Capacity Methodologies

Capacity calculation on Excel

Analyzed Scenarios(D1- A- B- C- D2)

Evaluation of scenarios through AHP method-Expert…

Conclusions

Preparation for the thesis

Presentation

Figure 1:Timetable for the master thesis during a period of 11 months

11 2 Introduction and purpose of the research The planning of the Palermo-Catania was developed using an approach taken on three different levels that can be synthesized as described below.

System classification level on an international network

The new fast link Palermo-Catania is inserted into the Scandinavian-Mediterranean corridor: Helsinki - Palermo/Augusta - Valletta (Figure 2(. The Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T), whose implementation can be factor of rapprochement and cohesion between the Southern regions of Italy and those of Northern Europe and Central-Eastern Europe, in the spirit of European economic and social cohesion policy (European Commission, "TENtec Interactive Map Viewer", 2019).

Figure 2: European high speed corridor n.5

12 Functional system of classification level of the local network

The single railway batch exam is designed for sighting needs and requirements dictated by the customer respecting the local territorial system (Figure 3), in which it is inserted. In this context, characteristic geo-territorial policies provide constraints and opportunities to deal with (RFI, "Nuovo Collegamento Palermo-Catania/ Direzione pianificazione strategica-market analysis").

Figure 3: local network

System level design

The design of the single railway batch is developed so that all the specialists work in an integrated manner and all the components of the rail system interact each other. The new link consists of fast services integrating socio-economic relations between the two main towns in the region, Palermo and Catania, seeks to broaden considerably the influence of regional rail transport, including in relations inside the region provinces too fast (Enna and Caltanissetta in particular), (Castiello, 2016).

The improvement of railway connections between Palermo and Catania has been one of the key topics about European rapid railway network, national and regional transport planning process for so many years but, due to the high budget for construction and operation in mountainous area, the decision for finding the optimal solution is difficult. The will of the stakeholders is to upgrade the actual railway system but in practice it’s not useful since the structure and infrastructure of this line is too old and is located in mountains. Therefore, speeding up the existing line not only is much more

13 costy than construction of new line but also not achieving the expected speed and won’t meet the aim of extension and catchment of the area. The development of Palermo-Catania railway accessibility is declared as a priority for both the EU program connecting Europe facility and the national plan. In this thesis work it is highlighted the need to speed up the most important part of the European corridor as a rapid line within the TEN-T corridor (Figure 4). At regional level, the upgrade of railway connections is mentioned both in the Regional Development Plan (2013) and in the Regional Plan on Mobility and Transportation (2016).

The main step of this upgrading process is the realization of the railway connection Palermo-Catania and considering the main problems and specify the best solutions according to the analysis of the functional characteristics and operation of project.

Figure 4: TEN-T core network corridors. corridor n°5 Helsinki-La Valletta

2.1.1 Main constraints of the existing line: 1. The existing line does not meet the requirements of European corridors and freight services: • The axial weight, gauge, high gradient of 31‰, small module of the passing track are not compliance with STI for freight (RFI, "Prefazione generale all'orario di servizio", edizione 1963 ristampa 2007). • The platform is not compliance with STI for passenger

14 • It has a small radius (315 m) that cause limitation of line speed (70÷130 km/h) and prevent the reduction in travel time (2h 59) 2. Low capacity of 45 trains/day 3. The track is in a mountainous area, to get acceptable slope and curve radius we should build new tunnels, viaducts, and civil work. The adjustment of the existing line to increase the performance of passenger trains and freight is not cheap. 4. Rolling stock (Minuetto electric 501-502) aren’t out of date, however, its max speed is 160km/h that isn’t suitable for the new rapid line with a max speed of 200 km/h 5. Each part of the line is constructed in different period and regarding different standard, so, not obey ST Standard 6. The existing railway operator Trenitalia on the Palermo-Catania provides fast regional trains type "Minuetto" which carry three intermediate stops in Termini Imerese, Caltanissetta Xirbi, and Enna by employing time 2 hours and 59 minutes. The bus operator on the same link proposes in time fourteen bus pairs non-stop, distributed homogeneously throughout the day (one pair per hour), with a 2 hour and 30 minutes of travel time. (Italferr A. P., 2013) In fact, today the train service, sold at prices slightly lower than those of bus, is not competitive with the service of the bus, for travel time, regularity, frequency and times of arrival and departure of the service between Palermo and Catania and therefore does not attractive to the users, (Figure 5) and (Table 1), is going to show the type of existing bus and train on this line.

Train Bus

Travel time 2h59’ 2h30’

Cost 13.50€ 14€

Frequency one pair1 per two hours one pair per hour

Table 1: Comparison of train and bus

Figure 5: Comparison means of transport (Minuetto train and bus services)

1 Round trip

15 2.1.2 Objective: Improvement of Railway Accessibility in Palermo-Catania 1. Realize a rail connection according to the interoperability standards2 (European Commission, "Regulations: Technical specifications for interoperability relating to the ‘infrastructure’ subsystem of the rail system in the European Union", 2014) by the European Mediterranean Scandinavian corridor. Table 2 is showing the existing and future technical specifications according to STI Standard in Palermo-Catania line. (FS Group P. G.), (RFI, "Prefazione generale all'orario di servizio", edizione 1963 ristampa 2007, p. 178)

Typology Signalling Max Speed in rank of track system gradient C(min-max) Palermo- Double Automatic 11 ‰ 100-140 km/ Fiumetorto track Block 4 codes h Fiumetorto- Single track Axle Counting 28 ‰ 85-130 km / h Lercara Block Lercara Single track Axle Counting 25 ‰ 60-100 km / h Diramazione- Block Caltanissetta X Caltanissetta Single track Axle Counting 31 ‰ 60-130 km / h Xirbi- Block Bicocca Bicocca- double Automatic 8 ‰ 95-130 km / h Catania track Block System at Fixed currents Catania- Single track Automatic 5 ‰ 55-95 km / h Catania Block System Central at Fixed currents New link of Doubling ERTMS / 18 ‰ 120-200km / Palermo- track ETCS h Catania

Table 2: comparison of existing and future technical specification

2. Build a rail link that can serve the future of freight and passenger traffic (see Table 2). 3. Reduce the travel time of passenger trains Palermo- Catania, less than two hours. (see Table 3). 4. Increase line capacity (freight + passenger trains) requires two tracks, so even for this requirement is necessary to realize (at least) a new binary in Table 3.

2 STI Standard

16 Existing line Future line

Gradient 31‰ 18‰

Radius 315 660

Speed 70-130 km/h 135-200 km/h

Travel Time 3h 00' 1h 50'

Capacity 45 trains/day 56+45 trains/day

Rolling Stock Minuetto Electric 501-502 E655-E402(414)-E464

Table 3: Future and existing, characteristic of the line 5. Improve the competitiveness of rail transport on a regional scale by increasing the performance levels of the services offered in terms of reduced travel time between the capital cities concerned (Palermo, Enna, and Catania), and only stop on the important stations from Palermo to Catania. 6. Increase the supply of railway services from “regional”, “fast regional” through the coordination of fast services “regional”, “fast regional”, intercity”, and “freight” between Sicilian provincial capitals, derive added value from the quality of the services. 7. Increase the level of railway interchange with the Sicily airport system comprising the airports of Palermo "Punta Raisi" and Catania "Fontanarossa" airport (FS Group R.-F.-A. I., 2010-2011), (Itelferr, 2015) as shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6:Node Catania-Integration of the modes of air and rail transport to the airport of Catania Fontanarossa

17 8. The capacity should supply the current and future demand in the Figure 7 (RFI, "Tabelle e figure fuori testo (nuovo collegamento Palermo-Catania)").

Figure 7:Estimate of the variation of the resident population in 2030 by municipality

9. The divide construction time of building each phase to distribute the high cost due to limited funds at the disposal local goverment. The construction phase of new line parallel to existing line indicated in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Timeline of implementation of the line for functional expansions

10. The analysis focuses on the realization of a new single track interconnected to the existing line as shows in Figure 9 involved in the process of development of railway connection between Palermo-Catania. The existing line is not abandoned and has interconnection with the new line, most of the stations survived, hence, the rules of “the internal corridor of European” is obeyed with the added value of more accessibility by increasing number of stations.

Figure 9: New single track interconnected to existing line (RFI, "Enhancement and redevelopment of the railway Messina-Catania- Palermo Itinerary", 2017)

In chapter 3 the methods for calculation capacity is studied, and specified the utilized methods in the thesis.

3 General review of Capacity Methodologies In this chapter, we propose a general review of methodologies for the evaluation of railway capacity. This review is useful to correctly understand the methods of analysis chosen, enhanced and integrated in this study.

Railway capacity is the outcome of close interaction between different subsystems of the railway: rolling stock, infrastructure, and timetable that link these together as shown in Figure 10. (Sameni, 2011)

Figure 10:Parameters in railway capacity

This complex interaction has been expresses through different definitions:

• “The ability of the carrier to supply as required the necessary services within acceptable service levels and costs to meet the present and projected demand.” (Kahan, 1979) • “Capacity is the highest volume (trains per day) that can be moved over a subdivision under a specified schedule and operating plan while not exceeding a defined threshold.” (Krueger, 1999) • “Line capacity is the maximum number of trains that can be operated over a section of track in a given period of time, typically 1 hour.” (Associates, 2003) • “Capacity is measured as the count of valid train paths over a fixed time horizon within an optimal master schedule”. (Harrod, 2009) • “The maximum number of trains that may be operated using a defined part of the infrastructure at the same time as a theoretical limiting value is not reached in practice.” (Hansen, 2008) • UIC has concluded that: “A unique, true definition of capacity is impossible.” UIC states that railway infrastructure capacity is a trade-off between the number of trains, heterogeneity, average speed and quality of service (stability). This is due to the discrete nature of capacity utilization. (UIC, 2004) • The number of trains that can be incorporated into a timetable that is conflict-free, commercially attractive, compliant with regulatory requirements, and can be operated in the face of anticipated levels of primary delay whilst meeting agreed performance targets (Barter, 2008)

Line capacity will depend on train performance, particularly braking and acceleration, length and how trains are controlled. How many trains can be run will also depend on the infrastructure – the power

21 available, the maximum line speed, the station spacing, the terminal design, gradients, and the railway control (signalling) systems. On top of that, the operating conditions-dwell times at stations, terminal operations, allowances for speed restrictions and recovery margins will also affect throughput. (Connor, 2012)

Line capacity and utilization rate can be determined by different methodologies as showing in Figure 11. The choice of the appropriate method for the evaluation of line capacity depends on the accuracy that it is necessary to obtain as a result. Certainly, simulation methods allow obtaining results with an optimal degree of accuracy evaluating what effectively happens on the line. However, the application on complex network results heavy and strictly linked with a scheduled timetable; for this reason, a critical aspect for the reliability of output is the possible introduction of arbitrariness if the timetable is unknown. Therefore, it is more recommendable to adopt analytical methods with an easier application for a first evaluation of traffic infrastructure condition. (Zanzarin, 2017-2018)

The decision to adopt deterministic or probabilistic methods depends on infrastructure characteristics and traffic typology. Application of probabilistic methods is appropriate in the case of railway infrastructure characterized by traffic with restricted speed variability and few services categories. Deterministic methods allow analyzing with precision complex railway network on which a complex timetable is operated, to assess the utilization degree of the single elements of a whole network. (Zanzarin, 2017-2018)

Synthetical UIC 406 method compress ion method Methods for Analytical UIC 405 calculation of method method line capacity

Analogical Open track method method

Figure 11: The schematization of methods for calculation line capacity

In the following, the different methods for calculation line capacity are under consideration.

3.1 Synthetic Method: 3.1.1 UIC’s Compression Method – LEAFLET 406: The method presented in this leaflet enables IMs to carry out capacity calculations, following common criteria and methodologies from an international standpoint for lines/nodes or corridors

22 based on different criteria such as traffic quality(market needs or company requirement), timetable quality(requirements of timetable compilers) or effective and economical utilization of infrastructure (IM requirements), (UIC, 2004) The goal of Capacity Analysis is to determinate the maximum number of train that can operate on a railway network in a defined time window (Italferr P. P.)

The UIC 406 standard defines a method to measure the available capacity that a railway infrastructure has, and widely implemented in the European railways. The capacity is measured by the number of trains that can run per unit of time.

As the UIC 406 standard explains the capacity is influenced by several factors:

• The signalling of the infrastructure. • The average speed of the trains. • The stability needed by the administrator to avoid huge disruptions in case of minor delays. • The heterogeneity of the traffic, that means, the balance between the number of faster trains and the number of slower trains. (Valentinovič, 2014)

Figure 12 shows that capacity is a balanced mix of the number of trains, the stability of the timetable, the high average speed achieved and the heterogeneity of the train system. It is, for instance, possible to achieve high average speed on a railway network by having a high heterogeneity - a mix of fast InterCity Express, InterCity and slower Regional trains serving all stations. However, the cost of having a high average speed with a high heterogeneity is that it is not possible to run as many trains with high stability (punctuality) than if all trains ran with the same speed. If it is wanted to run more trains it is necessary to run with less mixed traffic and thereby have a lower average speed. (Landex A. A., 2008)

Figure 12:The Balance of Railway Capacity by UIC CODE 406R

23 Number of trains

If the capacity is measured as the number of trains per hour, the capacity in a cross-section can be calculated as:

Where:

• K is capacity

• qmax is the maximum traffic Intercity [ trains/h] • n is the number of train path

When running many trains per hour it is not always possible to combine trains stopping at all stations and faster through going trains. This is due to the fact that the faster trains will catch up with the slower trains which causes conflicts (Figure 13).

Hence fast trains catch up with slower trains all trains will have the same stopping pattern when close to the maximum capacity - the timetable will be homogeneous. (Landex A. e., 2006)

Figure 13:Fast train catching up with a slower train

Heterogeneity:

A timetable is heterogeneous (or not homogeneous) when a train catches up another train. The result of a heterogeneous timetable is that it is not possible to run as many trains as if the timetable was homogeneous -all trains running at the same speed and having the same stopping pattern (Figure 14).

Figure 14:Heterogeneous (a) and homogeneous (b) timetable

To evaluate the heterogeneity of a timetable the SSHR and SAHR can be used.

The SSHR - Sum of Shortest Headway time Reciprocals - describes both the heterogeneity of the trains and the spread of trains over the hour:

Where:

• ht,i is the shortest headway time observed between two trains • N is the number of trains in the cycle observed

Since fast trains can be caught behind a slower train (figure 10) it is important to have enough headway at the arrival at the end of the line section to avoid secondary delays generated by operation conflicts, which are due to primary delays (unexpected extensions of the planned times of the individual processes scheduled).

The Sum of Arrival Headway time Reciprocals (SAHR) describes the spread of trains over the hour at the arrival station:

Where:

25 A • ht,i is the headway time observed between two trains at the end of the line section • N is the number of trains in the cycle observed

SAHR will always be smaller than or equal to the SSHR. The SAHR is only equal to SSHR in case of a homogeneous timetable and the difference will increase the more heterogeneous the timetable is. A measurement of the homogeneity can therefore be found by combining SSHR and SAHR formula:

The homogeneity is then equal to 1 when the timetable is completely homogeneous and opposes 0 when the heterogeneity increases. (Landex A. e., 2006)

Average speed:

A train consumes a different amount of capacity at different speeds. When a train stands still, the train consumes all the capacity since it occupies the block section for an infinite amount of time. When the train speeds up the train occupies the block section for shorter time whereas more trains can pass the same block section, more capacity is gained. However, when increasing the speed also the braking distance is increased which means that the headway distance and headway time are increased whereas capacity is lost (Figure 15).

As Figure 15 shows, IS the minimum headway time - and thereby the capacity - dependent on the speed of the train. For railway lines with discrete ATC (or no ATC system), the speed is even more important than continuous ATC systems since the function of the minimum headway time is discrete.

When both fast and slower local trains are running on the same railway line it is possible to achieve a high average speed. However, if the railway line has lack of capacity it might not be possible for the fast trains to run at the maximum speed (Figure 16), (Landex A. e., 2006).

Stability:

When discussing railway capacity, it is important to look at the stability of the railway system too. The stability of the railway system is difficult to work out as such. The punctuality of the trains is, however, derived from the stability.

Figure 15:Minimum headway time according to the speed of the train

Figure 16:The fast train (train 3) must reduce the speed due to conflicts

It is difficult to evaluate the stability (or punctuality) of a planned timetable not yet in operation. Experienced planners might, however, have an idea of how changes in a timetable or the infrastructure might affect the punctuality. It is only possible to estimate the punctuality of smaller changes in the timetable or infrastructure using the experience. If the effect on punctuality of larger changes in the infrastructure and/or timetable have to be estimated, it is necessary to use simulation tools such as RailSys®. Even though it is difficult to predict the future punctuality, a general rule of thumb is that the punctuality will drop when the capacity utilization increases (Figure 17).

Figure 17:The coherence between punctuality and capacity utilization

Even though it is possible to achieve higher capacity utilization on a railway line it is often said that there is no more capacity if the punctuality drops below a certain limit. Changing the timetable for the railway line examined may increase the punctuality so that it is possible to have higher capacity utilization before dropping below the punctuality level where it is said that there is no more capacity. This is due to the fact that the capacity for a given railway infrastructure is based on the interdependencies existing between the number of trains, the average speed, the stability (or punctuality) and the heterogeneity (differences in the speed) of the trains(Figure 12), (Landex A. e., 2006).

To evaluate the capacity utilization it is necessary to know both the infrastructure and the timetable. Therefore, the first steps of evaluating the railway capacity are to build up the infrastructure and create/reproduce the timetable. To evaluate the railway capacity according to the UIC 406 method, the railway network has to be divided into line sections. For each line section the timetable has to be compressed so that the minimum headway time between the trains is achieved. The process is shown in Figure 18. (Landex A. e., 2006), on the other words, The calculation of capacity consumption using the compression methodology must be applied in a single line section. To assess capacity and condensation for a line or a whole route, the capacity consumption of every single line section corridor is calculated. The higher value of capacity consumption on a line section corridor determines the capacity consumption along the whole line or route. To assess capacity along a corridor, an analysis corridor is carried out for every possible route along the corridor. (UIC, 2004)

The UIC Leaflet 406 (2004) states: “capacity consumption corridor be analysing within a line section through compressing timetable train paths in a pre-defined time window”. The methodology consists

28 of different Phases: the first one is to build up the infrastructure layout and the timetable of the line. Then the second one is the “compression” of the timetable to obtain the overall capacity consumption. (Landex A. e., 2006)

Figure 18:Workflow of the UIC 406 method

As described in the UIC 406 approach is based on timetable compression, in which “all single train paths are pushed together up to the minimum theoretical headway according to their timetable order, without recommending any buffer time”. The compression is conducted at a signal block level, with the maximum extent of the compression between successive trains being governed by the shortest interval between successive occupations by those trains of a single block section. The process is summarised in the uncompressed, planned timetable (Figure 19), and compressed timetable (Figure 20).

Figure 19: UIC 406, normal uncompressed timetable (Armstrong, 2011)

Figure 20: UIC 406- compressed timetable (Armstrong, 2011)

30 • All train paths are pushed together up to the minimum headway according to their timetable order, without buffer times. • The running times, overtaking, crossing, stopping times are not changeable. • Any occupation time must be incorporated. Also, indirect occupation times (times occupied and not available for further train paths). (Valentinovič, 2014)

The main problem of the UIC Code 406 method is to study relations between capacity consumption, time supplements and punctuality. The estimation of capacity consumption is executed with support by common simulation tools. The methodology does not exactly work out how to find out capacity consumption. (Gašparík J. a., 2010)

Occupation Time in Single Block Section

To understand the concept of compression we should consider that the calculation method suggested in UIC Code 406 is based on blocking time sequences. Because of safety reasons, block sections remain occupied, depending on signalling systems (Figure 21), if a release point behind them becomes free, that is the section itself becomes available for further use by the following train. The time it is used by a single train and it is not available for other trains, is given by the sum of times for:

• route formation; • clearance; • visual distance/driver reaction; • approach the section; • track occupation; all depending on the timetable, infrastructure and vehicle characteristics.

Figure 21:Elements of the block occupation time (Kaas, 1998)

The compression-based methodology does not solely incorporate timetabled train paths on the whole line section of the domain or on a part of the line section. Any occupation times, even when not related to the train paths, must be incorporated, those times, which are included in the occupation time, are called indirect occupation times.

Indirect occupation times are the times during which one track in a node in a few cases within a line section-is occupied and not available for further train paths. These indirect occupation times can either be connected (stabling of additional wagons, locomotive changeovers, etc.) or can be without any connection (crossing train from other line sections, shunting movements at the station with no specific mars corridor tracks, etc.) to timetable train paths. (UIC, 2004)

3.1.2 Calculation of Capacity Consumption For the estimation of the total capacity consumption, it is necessary to consider time reserves for timetable stabilization (i.e. buffer time B) and for maintenance (i.e. D) besides the minimum occupation time A and supplement for single-track lines (i.e. crossing buffer C).

The total consumption time k (Figure 22) can be calculated as:

k=A+B+C+D

32 • 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]

Given a reference time to (a chosen window time), the capacity consumption K [%] is defined as:

100푘 퐾 = 푈

• K: capacity consumption [%] • U: chosen time window [min] (Gašparík J. B., 2015)

Figure 22: Determination of capacity consumption (Italferr P. P., Introduction to railway project)

3.2 Analytical Method These methodologies are based on probabilistic expressions for the evaluation of circulation conditions on line. Analytical methods are deepened with respect of deterministic methods and they may be used not only for the evaluation of actual line capacity but also for future one. A limitation of this category of methods is that line capacity is calculated considering the critical section (the section with the longest running time) without considering the bordering sections. In fact, the output of the method represents the upper line capacity value. Furthermore, the utilization of analytical methodologies for complex lines characterized by speed variability is very difficult. At the end, these methods are used to obtain initial values of line capacity based on scheduled traffic operations.

33 3.2.1 UIC's analytical method-leaflet 405R This paragraph describes the analytical method proposed in its first edition by the International Union of Railway (UIC) in the leaflet 405R; despite this methodology was officially replaced in 2004 by the compression method (UIC's Leaflet 406) as a standard on capacity, it offers an efficient estimation of the capacity of a line. (Rotoli, 2015)

To summaries briefly the main characteristics of this approach, it is based on the following formula (Figure 23) for the capacity:

Figure 23: The capacity of a section expressed in number of trains in period T (Italferr P. P., Introduction to railway project)

• P is the capacity (daily, hourly, etc.) • T is the reference time (usually 24 hours for the daily capacity);

• tfm is the average minimum headway;

• tr is an expansion margin;

• tzu is an extra time based on the number a of the intermediate block sections on the line and

calculated by means of the formula tzu=0.25*a; this parameter considers that the increase of capacity on the determinant section, following its division into more block sections, is less than proportional to the reduction of the travel time. (Rotoli, 2015)

The average minimum headway for each line is calculated by the following equation:

34 Where th, ij is the minimum line headway for the train j following the train i and fij is the relative frequency of combination: train j following train i; this parameter is calculated based on the absolute frequency Fij derived by the timetable:

The expansion margin tr is defined as a running time margin added to train headways to reduce knock-on delays and to achieve an acceptable quality of service; it is calculated applying the queue theory considering the critical section as a service station (i.e. M/M/1 queuing system). In particular the length of the queue for entering the section is equal to the number of trains encountering a disturbance (delay) and it depends on the Intercity of traffic Ψ (utilization rate of the system) given by the ratio between the average number of arriving trains (λ=1/tfm + tr), i.e. inverse of the expected inter-arrival time) and the maximum number of trains which could simultaneously utilize the section

(µ=1/tfm) ,i.e. inverse of expected service time):

An extensive test campaign, carried out by UIC, led to the identification of the following threshold values for Ψ:

• 0.60 (corresponding to 1.5 users waiting in the queue) valid for an unlimited period (normal

operation of the system), hence the condition tr≥0.67tfm. • 0.75 (corresponding to 3.1 users waiting in the queue) valid for a short period of time (peak

hours), hence the condition tr≥0.33tfm;

By having assumed M/M/1 system the mean queue length (average number of delayed trains) will be equal to:

while the average time spent waiting (average delay per train) can be evaluated as:

35 The presented approach is based on very simple formulas and does not require a big amount of data, besides easy-to-get values such as the number of trains, reference period, etc. Anyway, the length (or the travel time) of the relevant block section of the line should be measured or at least hypothesized. It is for these reasons that we propose a possible simplified approach of this procedure in case of limited available data. (Rotoli, 2015)

3.3 Analogical Method Nowadays, several analogical simulation methods have found their natural application development in commercial tools. These instruments can simulate the rail traffic by generating graphs dynamically defined through equations in a defined timetable. It is possible to distinguish these simulation methods according to input and output data for the determination of rail capacity. Input parameters are classified into infrastructure, network parameters and effects of the operation. Output data can be theoretical capacity, commercial capacity, used capacity and residual capacity. Furthermore, these software environments have been classified based on main functions performed: simulation, optimization of timetables, railway capacity, infrastructure, facilities management, shifts, economic evaluation and sensitivity analysis. (Zanzarin, 2017-2018)

OpenTrack® is one of the common simulation packages in Europe. It was initially developed by Swiss Federal Institute of Technology-Zurich (ETH-Zurich) and has since 2006 been supplied by OpenTrack® Railway Technology Ltd. OpenTrack is also a timetable based simulation tool with several features, such as automatic conflict resolution based on train priority, routing options and delay probabilistic functions, as well as several outputs and reporting options, such as train diagram, timetable and delay statistics, station statistics, and speed/time diagram (Pouryousef, 2015); In the other words, It is able to simulate a complex network including lines and stations and it produces as outputs the graphic timetable and the average delays generated. The software reproduces in detail the signaling system and the topological characteristics of the network and considers dynamic characteristics of the vehicles. The performances of the network are evaluated by statistics on the circulation conditions generated by timetable perturbations. Imposed perturbations (e.g. failures of the systems, secondary delays) are determined on the basis of historic delays collected in a significant period (Zanzarin, 2017-2018).

3.4 Result of Analysed Capacity Calculation Methods: There are different approaches to evaluate the capacity of a railway network (depending as always on the level of detail of the available data) and are proposed various methodologies (with different complexity) to link the evaluation of utilized capacity to the probability and value of the expected delay; indeed depending on the data availability, synthetic, analytical or even simulation methods may be applied; nevertheless, as stated in, the results among the different approaches could slightly vary, mainly depending on input data and variables. (Rotoli, 2015), Chapter 3 is presented three main categories:

36 • Synthetic methods: based upon deterministic expressions, in these methods, variables cannot change their state and they assume fixed values during the reference time; from mathematical point of view they are equations were the unknown quantities are mutually independent, they are also called static methods. • Analytical methods: based upon probabilistic expressions; from mathematical point of view they are equations were the unknown quantities are mutually dependent, they are also called dynamical methods. • Analogical methods: they can be further divided into asynchronous methods (that provide the optimization of one or more variables) and synchronous methods (traffic simulation), for instance optimization methods are based on procedures looking for delays minimization in the mixed speed traffic, as well as the simulation methods represent the evolution of advanced research and are often used to validate the results of other methods. (Kontaxi, 2012)

The synthetical and analytical methods are very practical and apply during the phase of choosing a corridor when there are multiple alternatives, however, analogical method engage on planning and design phase for project verification.

3.4.1 Combined Analytical3- Analogical4 Approach In the thesis research, a combined analytical–simulation approach used to investigate the rail capacity. Parametric and heuristic modelling (in analytical approach) are more flexible when creating new aspects and rules for the analysis. On the other hand, updating the railroad component input data and criteria tends to be easier in the simulation approach, and the process of running the new scenarios is generally faster, although simulation may place some limitations when adjusting the characteristics of signalling or operation rules. A combined simulation–analytical methodology takes advantage of both methodologies’ techniques and benefits, and the process can be repeated until an acceptable set of outputs and alternatives is found (Figure 24). (Pouryousef, 2015).

Figure 24: Basic diagram of combined analytical–simulation approach for capacity analysis

3 UIC 405R 4 Opentrack® Simulation Software

37 3.4.2 Future Development: Utilization of UIC’s Leaflet 406 for Calculation Capacity The analytical method proposed in its first edition by the International Union of Railway (UIC) in the leaflet 405R; despite this methodology was officially replaced in 2004 by the compression method (UIC’s Leaflet 406) as a standard in capacity, it offers an efficient estimate of the capacity of a line. (Rotoli, 2015)

The UCI 405 and 406 approaches to capacity utilization analysis fundamentally similar, the used method by ITF is UIC 405 R which is considering the unit of time, average minimum headway(tfm) calculated with matrix, and taking into account to all potential sequence, however, it's not taking to account the real sequence of the trains.

The newest method UIC 406 R, employ timetable compression techniques to determine the extent of „spare‟ capacity on a route section for a given timetable (Armstrong, 2011) is considering number of trains path, so this is not an average value but it depends on the real sequence of the train, starting from the heterogeneous timetable, so, after compression as soon as all train paths are pushed together up to the minimum headway according to their timetable order, without buffer times, there won’t be further margin for capacity.

In the continue, we will consider the character of all analysed scenarios to have better decision making in the selection solution corridor.

4 Analysed Scenarios 4.1 Existing scenario 4.1.1 Overview of The Sicilian Network The Sicilian railway network consists of the following lines (Figure 25):

• Two coastal lines, Palermo-Messina and Messina-Syracuse. • Two internal guidelines, Fiumetorto-Agrigento, and Fiumetorto-Caltanissetta Xirbi-Enna- Catania, which have in common the stretch Fiumetorto-Roccapalumba a. • Some secondary lines to completion of the mesh between the nodes of Agrigento, Syracuse, Gela, Caltanissetta and Trapani. (Italferr, "Scenari d’intervento per il potenziamento infrastrutturale Palermo-Catania finalizzato alla realizzazione del corridoio europeo n.5 helsinki – valletta")

Figure 25:Rail network existing Sicily

4.1.2 Existing Line Characteristic The sections that constitute the current Palermo-Catania link have different infrastructure and station characteristics, with speed values and gradients, somwhere very disadvantageous for the operation. (Italferr E. A., 2018)

Table 4 is the main functional features (taken out of the Network Statement and Issues Lines booklet 5 (RFI, "Fascicolo linea 153", 2003), (RFI, "Fascicolo linea 155", 2003)and (RFI, "Fascicolo linea 157", 2003)) of the sections of Palermo-Catania link, providing, only for stations included in the project interventions, a detail in terms of platforms lengths and module of secondary tracks, however, not all service location carry out passenger services (e.g. PM Sciara hasn’t platform or passegger service) or are authorized to perform crossings between trains (e.g. Cerda hasn’t passing loop or doesn’t carry out train crossing).

5 Fascicolo Linea

39 Speed Station range Length of Track Module/Passing Route C(min- Gradient[‰] Service Location Platform(min- type Point(min-max) max) max) [m] [m] [km/h] Section 1 Cerda 90-104 Single Fiumetorto- 100-130 14 PM Sciara 273 track Montemaggiore Montemaggiore 97-189 183-250 Section 2 Roccapalumba 205-279 Single Montemaggiore- 85-95 28 172-186 track Lercara Lercara 304 PM Marcatobianco 333 Valledolmo 105

Section 3 Vallelunga 113-115 Single 405 Lercara- 60-100 25 Villaba 88-151 track 355 Caltanissetta PM Marianapoli 339 PM Mimiani 364 Caltanissetta 173-245 PM Lmera Section 4 Villarosa 140-180 390 Single Caltanissetta- 60-105 31 Enna 200-270 274 track Dittaino Leoforte Pirato 223-224 334 Dittaino 208-212 368 PM Raddusa 407 Section 5 Single PM Libertina 420 Dittaino- 90 15 track PM Sparagogna 424 Catenanuova Catenanuova 162-245 371

Table 4: Functional characteristics of the route’s intervention object-Existing Scenario

Figure 26 shows the functional layout of the existing scenario:

Figure 26:Functional Layout of Fiumetorto-Catenanuova-Existing Scenario (1/3)

42 Functional Layout of Fiumetorto-Catenanuova-Existing Scenario (2/3)

Functional Layout of Fiumetorto-Catenanuova-Existing Scenario (3/3)

4.1.3 Existing Operation Plan This section describes the existing operating model provided on Fiumetorto-Catenanuova, which came into force with the new Trenitalia timetable June-December 2018. In particular, on December 6th 2018, according to the Platform Integrated Circulation (PIC) were running; Table 5 and Figure 27 shows the operation model, with the detail of the frequencies of the expected services (On the whole line, to date, are not carried freight services), (Italferr E. A., 2018).

Service Category Service [Trains / day]

Fast Regional Palermo-Catania 10

Fast Regional Palermo-Catania-Siracusa 2

Regional Palermo-Lercara Dir-Agrigento 24

Regional Roccapalumba-Caltanissetta C. le 8

Regional C.le Caltanissetta-Catania 10

Regional Agrigento-Roccapalumba- 1 Caltanissetta C. le

Regional Catenanuova-Catania 2

Section Bicocca-Catenanuova 24

Section Catenanuova-Caltanissetta X. 22

Section Caltanissetta X-Roccapalumba 21

Section Roccapalumba-Fiumetorto 36

Table 5: Operating Plan on Fiumetorto-Catenanuova. Existing Scenario

4.1.4 Existing Rolling Stock Regional and fast regional services currently circulating on Fiumetorto-Catenanuova-line are provided with with the rolling stock Palermo-Catania, Catania-Catenanuova (Table 6), Palermo-Agrigento (Table 7), Roccapalumba-Caltanissetta (Table 8):

Services Palermo-Catania and Catania-Catenanuova

Blocked type: Minuetto Composed of a driving head Ale 501 [1Loco+2Wagons], a 2nd class central coach and a headboard Ale 502 in Rank C with a speed of 160 km/h, for a 50 m total length, 30 m width, 38 m height trains

Capacity 24 seats on first class, 122 seats on second hands, 23 folding seats,1 disable seat, Empty mass: 92 t

Type of braking system Electrical

Table 6: Existing circulating from Plaermo to Catania, and Catania to Catenanuova

Palermo-Agrigento Services

Blocked type: Minuetto Composed of a driving head Ale 501 (1 Loco + 2 Wagons], a central 2nd class coach and a headboard Ale 502 in Rank C with a speed of 160 km/h, for a 50 m total length, 30 m width, 38 m height trains.

Blocked type: Minuetto Composed of a drive head 501 Ale, four 2nd class coach and a headboard "Ale 502", with speeds of 130 km/h, For a 100 m total length.

Table 7: Existing circulating Palermo-Agrigento

45 Roccapalumba-Caltanissetta Services

Single Aln 668 for a length of 23 m

Single Aln 668 for a total length of 46 m

Table 8: Existing circulating Roccapalumba-Caltanissetta

Along the Palermo-Catania line currently do not circulate intercity and freight services (Italferr E. A., 2018).

Figure 27:Operation Plan on Fiumetorto-Catenanuova. Existing Scenario

4.1.5 Existing Travel Time The existing travel time from Palermo and Catania extracted from PIC on December 6th 2018 is 2 hours and 48 minutes, of which about 13.5 minutes of punctuality buffer. This service has 1 minute stops in Termini Imerese, Caltanissetta Xirbi and Enna. The details of the data extracted from PIC in Table 9:

Table 9: PIC extraction of the Regional Fast Train 3804

A train running simulation was performed on the current route by the IF-SIM6 specialist software in order to compare it later on with that of the project scenario.

Figure 28 reports the speed diagram between Palermo and Catania to verify the above travel time, with an indication of traffic capacity object of study.

6 IF-SIM is a specialist and self-proprietary software created by Italferr in order to perform the train running simulations.

Figure 28: Train running simulation-Speed/distance diagram fast regional service Palermo-Catania, and vertical alignment of the line- Existing scenario (IF-SIM)

The current simulated travel time between Palermo and Catania is 2 hours 48 minutes, exactly corresponding with that in the timetable. (Italferr E. A., 2018)

4.1.6 Existing Line Capacity In this section we study the results of the estimation of the existing line capacity, elaborate on the expected functional Sections, through the application of UIC 405-1 FICHE R.

On the single track between Fiumetorto-Catenanuova, the highest pure journey time (critical section), is recorded on the route between Caltanissetta Xirbi-Villarosa stations. The aforesaid section is 15.287 km long, the gradient is 31 ‰, and average speed in rank C about 85 km/h (commercial speed 78.4 km/h).

Figure 29 shows an extraction from the spreadsheet related to the above capacity estimation, in which you can detect all the factors that affect the calculation, including the current operational planand the operating period.

Figure 29: Calculation capacity on the single track between Fiumetorto-Catenanuova

The capacity of single track between Fiumetorto and Catenanuova was estimated to 45 trains/day. Table 10 is shown the critical section detected, the pure travel time of the critical, the operating model, and the value of the estimated capacity (Italferr E. A., 2018).

49 Operating Travel Time Capacity Functional Section Critical Section Model [Trains/day] [Minutes] [Trains/day]

Section 1: PM Sciara- 12 Fast 6 min for Fast Regional Fiumetorto- Montemaggiore B. Regional 77 Montemaggiore 7 min to Regional (9.6 km) 24 Regional Belsito

Section 2: Montemaggiore B.- 12 Fast 6 min for Fast Regional Roccapalumba Regional 58 Montemaggiore B.- 11 min for Regional Dir Lerch (8.651 km) 24 Regional

Section 3: PM Mimiani SC- 12 Fast 8 min for Fast Regional Caltanissetta X Regional 62 Lerch Dir- 9 min for Regional Caltanissetta X. (9.462 km) 9 Regional

Section 4: Caltanissetta X- 12 Fast 10 min for Fast Regional Villarosa Regional 45 Caltanissetta X- 13 min for Regional Dittaino (15.287 km) 10 Regional

Section 5: Raddusa PM-PM 12 Fast 5 min for Fast Regional Libertinia Regional 80 Dittaino- 5 min to Regional Catenanuova (7.205 km) 10 Regional

Table 10: Estimated Capacity for single track between Fiumetorto-Catenanuova. Existing Scenario

In the following the research is going to proposes five upgrade scenarios shows in Table 11 and Figure 30 (Itelferr, 2015). In the 1st scenario, we introduce doubling existing line in three phases as each one is upgrade of previous phase. In the 2nd scenario, is related to double track from Castelbuono-Pollina and Catenanuova. The 3rd scenario is construction of new station of Enna and doubling track of Fiumetorto-Enna-Catenanuova-Catania. The 4rd scenario is highway scenario and double track Fiumetorto-Enna-Catenanuova-Catania, and finally the last and optimal one is construction of single- track line parallel and interrelated to existing line but respect to STI standard.

50 scenarios description Corridor D1(SABIR) Doubling existing line Corridor A Double track Fiumetorto-Pollina-Catenanuova- Catania Corridor B Double track Fiumetorto-Enna-Catenanuova- Catania Corridor C Highway-double track Fiumetorto-Enna- Catenanuova-Catania Corridor D2 Upgrading existing line+ new rapid single track Table 11: Comparison of different Corridors

Figure 30:Variants Infrastructure Corridors

51 4.2 Corridor D1-(SABIR): Doubling of The Existing Line in The Fiumetorto – Bicocca In theory the design alternative constituted by the doubling of the historical line involves the territories already served today by the existing railway connection but, with a view to optimizing the use of the infrastructure and speeding up of services, it was foreseen the elimination of the stops currently not open to the public or characterized by poor attendance rates, maintaining instead, the service in those which, are necessary to satisfy the demand for mobility in the related traffic areas.

For the alternative under consideration the stations / stops that will carry out the passenger service are Figure 31:

• Lercara station, where the aggregation of the traffic basins involving the localities of Montemaggiore, Valledolmo, Vallelunga and Villalba is assumed;

• Caltanissetta Xirbi in its new location;

• Nuova Enna located in a different position from that of the current station;

• Catenanuova. (RFI, "Studio di fatibilita del raddopio della tratta Fiumetorto-Raddusa agira della nuova linea Palermo-Catania")

Figure 31:Functional scheme of the alternative relating to the redevelopment of the historic line

52 4.2.1 Functional Analysis of Corridor D1 The hypothesis of creating the new corridor alongside the current line (doubling alongside) is favorable only in the section between Catenanuova and Catania.

In the Fiumetorto - Catenanuova section, the historic line has extremely restrictive characteristics for trains:

• Small radius in approach to line and tunnels that represent invariant points for the adaptation of the existing layout; • High longitudinal gradients with maximum values up to 28‰, largely over 12‰ eligible for interoperable lines. (Italferr, "New connection Palermo-Catania", 2009)

4.2.1.1 Declared Data from Study SABIR Operational Project

Reorganization time with enhancement of the fastest connections, through the reduction of intermediate stops from 7 to 3 by using the current rolling stock, with consequent reduction of the total time estimated by 200' to 185'.

Tactical Project

Using new tilting rolling stock, more powerful than those currently in service, on the current infrastructure with consequent reduction of the estimated total time from 185’ to 135' (possible institution of P rank on Fiumetorto-Bicocca section, to be checked in relation to the degree of tortuosity of the line).

Strategic Project

Using new tilting rolling stock more powerful than that currently in service, on enhanced infrastructure with:

• Doubling Catania-Enna:

• Speeding Enna-Roccapalumba;

• Speeding Roccapalumba-Fiumetorto (common with Palermo-Agrigento line ), (Italferr, "New connection Palermo-Catania", 2009), (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania", 2012).

4.2.1.2 Speeding "Strategic Project" In Figure 32 the speeding current track layout of Strategic Project in SABIR studio is regarded. For a first evaluation of speeding have analyzed the effects of an increase of the minimum line speed (target speed) at 90 and 100 km/h.

53 It is then evaluated:

• The maximum theoretical travel time compared to a no stop service from Bicocca to Fiumetorto; • The overall extension of the speedup intervention compared to the existing infrastructure (Italferr, "New connection Palermo-Catania", 2009).

MESSINA

15 km 61 km FIUMETORTO OGLIASTRILLOCEFALU' CASTELBUONOPOLLINA PATTI 9 km 43 km 20 km 3 km 6 km 81 km GIAMPILIERI PALERMO

in appalto/ prossimo appalto 42 km

26 km FIUMEFREDDO

34 km ROCCAPALUMBA in appalto CATANIA OGNINA 56 km 4 km 3 km CATANIA C.LE ENNA 45 km CATENANUOVA 26 km 28 km 4 km CATANIA CALTANISSETTA 9 km ACQUICELLA AGRIGENTO XIRBI MOTTA 1a ipotesi BICOCCA

SIRACUSA Figure 32:Speeding Existing Track Studio SABIR "Strategic Project"

4.2.1.3 Features Existing Track General Data In Figure 33, the profile of interaction among progressive, tunnels and the radii of curvature of the line between Fiumetorto and Cataenanuova is shown.

Figure 33: Profile of interaction between the progressive, tunnels and the radii of curvature of the line

In Figure 34, the extended intervetion (70 km) and the total recovery (5’) with rank B for speeding up the line Fiumetorto-Bicocca to 90 km/h. (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo- Catania", 2012)

Figure 34: Max speed values 90 km/h with Rank B

55 The possibility of speeding up to 100 km/h was not considered because it would require the reconstruction of the whole line, as shown in Figure 35 (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania", 2012).

Figure 35: Max speed value 100 km/h with Rank B

56 4.2.1.4 Travel Times The travel time of scenario D1 is showing in Table 12 (Italferr, "New connection Palermo-Catania", 2009).

Hypotheses N° of stops Travel time

Existing Catania-Palermo 12 stops 215 '

Catania-Palermo non-stop 180 '

Hypothesis A: non-stop Reduction about 5 'of 71 km

Speed up to 90 km / h

Total distance about PA-CT 175 ' (Rank B)

Total distance about PA-CT 155’ (Rank P)

Speed up to 100 km / h non-stop service Reduction of approximately 14 'of 165 km

Total mileage PA-CT about 166 ' (Rank B)

Hypotheses B: Speed up to 90 Non-stop service Reduction of approximately 38 km / h and doubling Enna- 'of 71 km Catania

Total mileage PA-CT about 118 ' (Rank P)

Table 12: Travel time of scenario D1 according to various hypotheses

57 4.2.1.5 Realization The realization is into 3 parts as shown in the layout of Figure 36

Figure 36:Assumptions phases realization "Strategic Project" Phase 1

Doubling Catenanuova-Bicocca with strengthening relations on enna, caltanissetta and integration with the Catania metropolitan transport system (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania", 2012).

The doubling of the Catenanuova-Bicocca allows the immediate strengthening of regional services between Enna and Catania

It will also bring benefit to and from Catania's Fontanarossa airport through the implementation of a dedicated stop.

Phase 2

Reduction of journey times Enna-Catenanuova with strengthening through speedups and/or doubling of intermediate sections:

• Speeding to 90 km/h;

• Doubling Catenauova-Enna.

Phase 3

Fiumetorto-Enna speedups to 90 km/h (Italferr, "New connection Palermo-Catania", 2009).

58 4.2.2 Results of Corridor D1 The issues to be addressed to improve the service by means of infrastructure projects are:

• Difficult raise of the track speed due to the presence of significant plano/altimetric constraints (e.g. small radius curves that fit in a tunnel) (Italferr, "New connection Palermo-Catania", 2009), (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo- Catania", 2012), with reduction of journey times lower than expected (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania", 2012);

• Considerable extension of variants offsite of the track;

• Plotting speed lower than that identified in corridor A (Fesaibility Study RFI 2010) with longer travel times;

• Total length of the connection Palermo-Catania 48 km longer than the Feasibility Study RFI 2003 (Fiumetorto-Castelbuono track);

• Necessary widespread interventions to increase the minimum line speed over 90 km/h, with overall reduction lower than expected;

• Significant incidence of costs for upgrading or relocation of some stations and suppression of level crossings (Italferr, "New connection Palermo-Catania", 2009)

59 4.3 Corridor A: Double Track Castelbuono-Pollina-Catenanuova Corridor A is represented by a direct route hypothesis hypothesis between Castelbuono, Pollina and Catenanuova in (Figure 37).

POLLINA km 80+500 circa (*) PALERMO MESSINA CORRIDOR A CASTELBUONO Modulo binari km 74+500 circa 350/400 m (*) In fase di Posto di Comunicazione InizioKm intervento73+500 circa progettazione km 93+600 circa

100

Posto di Movimento km 132 circa 100 Modulo binari PMZ 750 m 100 LINEA ESISTENTE NUOVO CORRIDOIO PALERMO-CATANIA IN FASE DI REALIZZAZIONE E DI PROSSIMO APPALTO A CURA DI ALTRO PROGETTO

CATENANUOVA km 153+200 circa 100 ENNA Modulo binari

750 m MANUTENTIVO 100 POLO BICOCCA MOTTA S. A. km 191+600 circa Sferro km 181+300 circa Aeroporto km 166+100 circa km 192+800 circa 100 100 CATANIA SSE Modulo binari INTERPORTO 350 m PRIMA FASE FASCIO A/P ED ASTE MANOVRA ASTE FASCIO RIORDINO INTERMODALI SIRACUSA, GELA ASTE INTERMODALI ZONA ZONA INDUSTRIALE ASI INDUSTRIALE ASI

Figure 37:Corridor A Castelbuono-Pollina-Catenanuova

In this hypothesis, the Catenanuova station will function as a rail-bus intermodal interchange (by the connections to the road and motorway network) and rail-rail intramodal interchange (by the coordination of the timetables of the railway services on the existing line Fiumetorto-Catenanuova- Bicocca), (Italferr, "New connection Palermo-Catania", 2009); it is the solution that minimizes the length of the track and journey times between Palermo-Catania. (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania", 2012)

4.3.1 Functional Analysis of doubling Castelbuono-Pollina Compared to the solution proposed in the feasibility study of RFI 2003, which provides for the realization of the junction for Catania in the tunnel between Cefalù and Castelbuono and the realization of a first portion of doubling of approximately 12 km parallel to the existing line, it has been evaluated the possibility of provide for the extension of the double track for Messina up to Pollina, with the effect of simplifying the implantation of Castelbuono and rationalize the structure of a network system between Castelbuono and Pollina, as a common section of the new Palermo- Catania connection up to Pollina. A new junction in Pollina would switch between Messina and Catania directions and the abutting metropolitan character of the services that are centered on Palermo junction.

60 4.3.2 Result of Corridor A: An important transport effect is due to the extension of the railway node Palermo to Pollina, with the extension in the new facility Pollina terminus of regional and metropolitan rail services.

In Figure 38 the profile and planimetry of corridor A is shown:

Figure 38:Profile and planimetry of corridor A

The route covers about 117,177 km, with about 68,300 km of tunnels and 43,667 km of trench. The longest tunnel is equal to 31.500 km, as shown in Figure 39, (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania", 2012).

Figure 39:Corridor A- extension of civil works

The technical reference standard is analysed by FSI study is bringing in Table 13 (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania", 2012).

Maximum speed 160 km/h (200 km/h in the central section Catenanuova- Pollina) Maximum gradient 12 ‰ Wheelbase running lines 4.00 m Type of traction Electric with a 3 kV line to 440 mm² Safety and signaling system ACC-Multistazione Spacing systems SCMT (V≥160km/h) in the Bicocca-Pollina section

BABcc with SCMT in the Pollina-Castelbuono section

Operation control system SCC with central post in Palermo Axial Weight Category 22.4 t (D4) Profile Gabarit "C" Table 13: Technical Reference Standard (Italferr, Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo- Catania, 2012)

In scenario A, to reach Enna and Caltanissetta from Palermo it was considered the interchange Catenanuova. Using services, however, is travel a relatively long with long travel times on the existing line. (Italferr, "New connection Palermo-Catania", 2009). A capability level, there were no particular

62 problems, although Palermo-Fiumetorto presents a high level of utilization due to the difference in ffequency between metropolitan services (2 trains/h) and fast (up to 3 trains/h). Table 14 shows the travel times in minutes of fast regional services Scenario A (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania", 2012).

Scenario A EN CL AG PA CT

EN 24’ 111’ 100’ 61’

CL 24’ 87’ 124’ 85’

AG 111’ 87’ 133’ 172’

PA 100’ 124’ 133’ 79’

CT 61’ 85’ 172’ 79’

Table 14: The travel times in minutes of fast regional services Scenario A

Current times in Table 15 (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania", 2012).

EN CT PA CL

EN 78’,4stops 65’, 168’,2 113’, hypoth transfers hypoth esis no esis no stop stop

CT 78’,4stops 65’, 184’,4stops 178’, 116’,7stops 86’, hypoth hypoth hypoth esis no esis no esis no stop stop stop

PA 168’,2 transfers 113’ 184’,4stops 178’, 128’, 1 transfer 92’, hypoth hypoth hypoth esis no esis no esis no stop stop stop

CL 116’,7stops 86’, 128’,1 transfer 92’, hypoth hypoth esis no esis no stop stop

Table 15: The existing travel time

63 In all hours it is possible to insert the IC services as a 30' reinforcement of the fast Regional trains. In the unpeak hours (in which the IC services are not present) there is sufficient capacity margins for at least one pair of freight services between Termini Imerese and Bicocca terminals. Emerging critical issues on the single-track line Enna-Catenanuova, where there is a 30 minute timing, which involves a certain wastage for the crossings (FS Group R.-F.-A. I., 2010-2011). Figure 40 shows the graphical timetable for the new Palermo-Catania line in the morning rush hour (6-10). (FS Group R.-F.-A. I., 2010-2011)

Figure 40:Occupation graph of the new Palermo-Catania from 6 to 10

64 4.4 Corridor B: Double Track Castelbuono-Pollina- New Enna The different alternatives of corridors investigated by RFI, all double track, allow to realize and pursue an overall and homogeneous increase of the capacity of the route (220 trains/day). Performance characteristics of the infrastructure scenario B is shown in Figure 41.

The capacity of the new fully double track infrastructure, net of the regional traffic would still enhanced, would be adequate for an international corridor can generate and attract freight traffic through the interchange strategic issues such as maritime links such as the name the international Helsinki - Valletta corridor suggests (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo- Catania", 2012).

Figure 41:Layout of Functional Corridors Castelbuono-Pollina-New Enna

4.4.1 Functional Analysis of Corridor B In Scenario B, the corresponding corridor provides a very different path from the previous, further stretched, but which allows to realize a stop to Enna directly on the new line. Such infrastructure configuration leads to a further reduction in the journey time between Enna and Palermo-Catania. However, this significant improvement is not exploitable services coming from Caltanissetta, which occurs at interchange Catenanuova (as in Scenario A), with a total travel time of 110 '. Table 16 shows the travel times in minutes of fast regional services Scenario B (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania", 2012).

65 Scenario B EN CL AG PA CT

EN/EN NEW 24’ 111’ 55’ 30’

CL 24’ 87’ 110’ 86’

AG 111’ 87’ 133’ 173’

PA 55’ 110’ 133’ 85’

CT 30’ 86’ 173’ 85’

Table 16: The travel times in minutes of fast regional services Corridor B

Scenario B would include, travel time in Table 17:

EN CT PA CL

EN 78’,4stop 65’, 168’,2 113’, s hypothesis transfers hypothesis no stop no stop

CT 78’,4stops 65’, 184’,4stop 178’, 116’,7stops 86’, hypothesis s hypothesis hypothesis no stop no stop no stop

PA 168’,2 113’, 184’, 178’, 128’,1 92’, transfers hypothesis hypothesis transfer hypothesis no stop 4stops no stop no stop

CL 116’, 86’, 128’,1 92’, hypothesis transfer hypothesis 7stops no stop no stop

Table 17: The existing travel time

4.4.2 Results of Corridor B The scenario B includes the realization of the connection between Castelbuono Pollina and Enna (Figure 42) and the track doubling between Enna and Catania, which begs the railway as protagonist for links Palermo-Enna-Catania (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania", 2012).

Figure 42:Corridor B Connection of Castelbuono-Pollina-New Enna

The route covers about 137,460 km, with about 50% (74,994 km) of tunnels as shown in Figure 43.

Figure 43:Corridor B- Extension of Civil Works

To compare the cost of intervention has been done by FSI study, consider the Table 18. (Italferr, "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania", 2012)

Solution Cost

Corridor B 18% Corridor A Table 18: Intervention Cost

4.5 Corridor C-(Highway): Double Track Enna-Fiumetorto Highway, corresponding to the hypothesis of building the new connection according to the infrastructure corridor of the A19 Highway shows in Figure 44. (RFI, "Studio di fatibilita del raddopio della tratta Fiumetorto-Raddusa agira della nuova linea Palermo-Catania")

Figure 44:Layout of functional highway corridor

4.5.1 Functional Analysis of Corridor C: The layout of highway corridor C can be divided into 3 parts, shown in Figure 45:

Figure 45:Assumptions Phases Realization Phase 1

Strengthening the the section Catenanuova-Bicocca

Phase 2

Doubling of the section Enna- Catenanuova and joint development of the strategic plan;

Phase 3

Construction of the new connection Enna- Fiumetorto for the fast connections Palermo-Catania. (Italferr, "New connection Palermo-Catania", 2009)

4.5.2 Result of Corridor C The main advantages by this corridor:

• Travel time Palermo-Catania simulated (without recovery): about 1h 20 '; • Reduced impact on territories due to the use of the A19 motorway corridor; • 29 km of tunnel extensions instead of 37 km with Corridor A; • Doubling of Enna-Catenenanuova section as a continuation of Fiumetorto-Castelbuono under construction; • Doubling of Enna-Catenanuova-Bicocca is the common assumption of the strategic project of Sabir study; • More extensive reconnection (about 10 km) with RFI 2003 study.

69 4.6 Scenario D2 -(Future Corridor): Existing Line Upgrade+ New Rapid Single Track The analysis of the functional characteristics of the design and operation of speeding up interventions and an increase in performance of the new connection Palermo-Catania in general. A Corridor to the scenario of doubling future corridor provides for:

1. The design of the single track line between Fiumetorto and new Catenanuova, and allocation of fast connections and freight trains to the new line. In this hypothesis of the project, the new line and the existing have interconnected in the junctions. 2. The design of interventions of adjustment of the existing line on certain routes and program which are not already adequate in the previous design.

The new single track Fiumetorto-Catenanuova is designed to ensure consistency with the line performance identified in the 2014 study according to TSI 2011 (Category V- M), which now correspond, according to TSI 2014, the categories of line P4 for passenger traffic in Table 19 and F2 for freight traffic in Table 20. (European Commission, "Regulations: Technical specifications for interoperability relating to the ‘infrastructure’ subsystem of the rail system in the European Union", 2014)

Traffic Code Gauge Limit Axle Load[t] Line Length of Speed(km/h) Platform(m) P1 GC 17(*) 250-350 400 P2 GB 20(*) 200-250 200-400 P3 DE3 22.5(**) 120-200 200-400 P4 GB 22.5(**) 120-200 200-400 P5 GA 20(**) 80-120 50-200 P6 GI 12(**) n.d. n.d. P1520 S 22.5(**) 80-160 35-400 P1600 IRL1 22.5(**) 80-160 75-240

Table 19: Performance parameters for passenger traffic

70 Traffic Code Gauge Limit Axle Load[t] Line Speed(km/h) Length of Platform(m)

F1 GC 22.5(*) 100-120 750-1050

F2 GB 22.5(*) 100-120 600-1050

F3 GA 20(*) 60-100 500-1050

F4 G1 18(*) n.d. n.d.

F1520 S 25(*) 50-120 1050

F1600 IRL1 22.5(*) 50-100 150-450

Table 20: Performance Parameters for freight traffic

The reference design scheme compared to the existing scenario, to achieve improvements in terms of travel times and to have a single track interoperable and fast, parallel to existing line Palermo- Catania.

The construction of the new line has been assumed for functional in six sections from Fiumetorto to Catenanuova in different time horizons. The activations of the Sections may take place according to the following temporal sequence hypotheses (Table 21 and Figure 46): (Italferr E. A., 2018)

Figure 46:Timeline of implementation of the line for functional expansions

1st Phase Section 1 Section 5b Fiumetorto- PM Palomba Montemaggiore (between Dittaino- new Catenanuova)- Catenanuova 2nd Phase Section 2 Section 5a Section 4b Montemaggiore- Dittaino- Dittaino- Lerch Branch PM New Enna Palomba 3rd Phase Section 4a Caltanissetta Xirbi- New Enna 4th Phase Section 3 Lerch- Caltanissetta Xirbi Table 21: Development phase- construction layout sections

4.6.1 Future Line Characteristic The functional characteristics of the future scenario is taken as reference designs for the five Sections that make up the line from Fiumetorto to Catenanuova:

Table 22 summarizes the main functional characteristics required for each Section, with an indication of the planned project interventions (in red), and length of stations compared in Figure 47.

72 Speed Station range Length of Module/Passing Route Track type C(min- Gradient[‰] Service Location Platform(min- Point(min-max) max) max) [m] [m] [km/h] Section 1 Cerda 250 600 Fiumetorto- Single track 100-130 14 PM Sciara 273 Montemaggiore Montemaggiore 97-189 183-250 New fast 110-200 13 Cerda 250 600 single track Montemaggiore 250 350 Section 2 Roccapalumba 205-279 Montemaggiore- Single track 85-95 28 172-186 Lercara Lercara 304 New fast 155-200 16 Lercara 250 350 single track Section 3 PM Marcatobianco 333 Lercara- Valledolmo - Caltanissetta 105 Vallelunga 350 350 Single track 60-100 25 Villaba 355 88-151 PM Marianapoli 339

PM Mimiani 364

Caltanissetta 350 350 New fast 135-200 18 PM Marcatobianca 600 single track Vallelunga 350 350 New PM 600 Marianapoli 350 600 PM San Cataldo 350 Caltanissetta Xirbi. Section 4 PM Lmera Caltanissetta- Villarosa 140-180 390 Dittaino Single track 60-105 31 Enna 200-270 274 Leoforte Pirato 223-224 334 Dittaino 208-212 368 New fast 135-200 18 PM Villarosa 600 single track New Enna 350 350 Dittaino 250 600 Section 5 PM Raddusa 407 Dittaino- PM Libertina 420 Single track 90 15 Catenanuova PM Sparagogna 424 Catenanuova 350 350 New fast 135-180 15 PM Palomba 350 single track Catenanuova 350 350 Table 22: Functional characteristics of functional Sections in the first functional phase. In red the planned project interventions

73 600 500 400 300 200 100 LENGTH OF STATIONS(MIN-MAX)m 0

New Length of Stations

PM PM Raddusa…

Caltanissetta…

Villarosastation

PM PM Sparagogna…

PM PM Marianopoli…

Vallelungastation

PM PM Marcatobianco…

Roccapalumbastation

Fiumetortoswitches(P… Leonforte-piratostation PM PM sciaraswitches(PM)

Figure 47:Length of stations

Figure 48 is showing the schematic single line for the realization of the future scenario from Fiumetorto to Catenanuova. (Italferr E. A., 2018)

Figure 48:Single-line diagram Palermo- Catania. 1st functional phase

Single-line diagram Palermo- Catania. 2nd functional phase

Single-line diagram Palermo- Catania.3rd functional phase

Single-line diagram Palermo- Catania.4th functional phase

4.6.1.1 Crossing of Freight Trains; In the first phase, traffic management, ensuring the crossings between freight trains and providing to facilitate the movement of passenger trains carrying precedence for freight trains, in the locality in which a binary modulus equal to 600 m was expected, in accordance with the performance parameters set by the category of line F2 of the infrastructure TSI 2014.

The places of the crossing of freight services, listed below, have been identified with a view to ensuring an average between the stations of crossing about 25 km (never more than 38 km):

1. Cerda station, in which the connection with the future freight village of Termini Imerese is expected (the location of which is planned to the east of Fiumetorto). A 600 m track module is foreseen in this station to allow the parking of freight trains before sending the train to the freight village. 2. PM Marcatobianco located in the existing line at a distance of 37.8 km from Palermo and 20.9 km from Catania. 3. New PM Marianopoli located at a distance of about 14.2 km from the next station used for the precedence / intersection of freight services on the Catania side. 4. New PM San Cataldo located at a distance of about 18.9 km from the next station used for the precedence / intersection of freight services from Catania side. The 600 meter module is available at this station, in order to avoid the precedence / intersections of the freight services from Caltanissetta X side. 5. New PM Villarosa located at a distance of about 28.7 km from the next station used for the precedence / intersection of freight services from Catania side. 6. Dittaino Station, located in the existing line at a distance of about 34 km from the next station of Sferro, for the precedence / intersections of freight services with a 600 m module. This form is in the service of the Dittaino industrial area.

Figure 49 shows the single line diagram of the first phase with an indication of the timing of crossing sections for freight services. (Italferr E. A., 2018)

Figure 49: Single-line diagram. Timing of Crossover Posts for Freight services on the new fast line

4.6.1.2 Crossover Passenger Services on The New Line In the first phase, traffic management will through precedence/crossing between the service locations trains in which a binary 350 m has been provided, in accordance with the parameters of performance expected from the category of line P4 of the TSI infrastructure 2014.

The scheduling of crossing passenger services is approximately 12 km and it is never more than 17 km.

The Cerda, Lerch Branch, Vallelunga, Caltanissetta Xirbi, Dittaino, and Catenanuova will be the points of convergence/divergence between new and existing line.

The sorting of trains between a rail system in two single track and a double track system is provided in place of Cerda (Palermo side) and Catenanuova (Catania side). The operation between Fiumetorto and Cerda and between Catenanuova and Bicocca will double track.

Figure 50 shows the functional diagrams of the new and existing line, provided in the first development phase, with the indication of the timing of crossing for passenger services.

Figure 50: The cadence of crossing places for passenger services on the new fast line

4.6.1.3 Functional Layout of The Stations Table 23 is a summary of the functional characteristics required for the service locations that serve the new line, according to number of tracks, the track form, and length of platforms. (Italferr E. A., 2018)

Common to Passenger No. module rails sidewalks Location new line existing line service track (m) (m) Section 1 Cerda Station x x 4 600 250 X Montemaggiore station B. (Only side x 4 350 250 Catania) Section 3

Station Lerch Dir. x x 4 350 250

PM Marcatobianco x 2 600

Station Vallelunga x x 4 350 350

PM Marianopoli 2 600

PM San Cataldo 2 600

Station Caltanissetta Xirbi x x 4 350 350

Section 4

Villarosa PM 2 600

Station New Enna x 4 350 350

Station Dittaino x x 3 600 250

Section 5

Palomba PM 2 350

Station New Catenanuova x x 4 350 350

Table 23: Functional characteristics of Station Scenario Before Functional Phase

4.6.2 Future Operating Model This section describes the operating model. This operating model has been developed from the following inputs received by RFI:

• Capacity assumed: 58 trains/day on the Lerch-Catenanuova • Distribution of traffic flows between the existing line and new line: the new line will be dedicated to the fast connections (fast intercity and regional) and freight trains. on the old line will remain regional services that will continue to serve the existing stations. The differentiation of the operating data of the lines considered the capabilities of each.

Table 24 provides a model synthesis of year, with the allocation of services assumed between the new and existing line.

Operating Model Operating Model Operating 1st Phase of New 1st Phase of New Service Category Service Model 1st Line Line Phase [tr / dd] [Tr / dd] [Tr / dd] Intercity Palermo-Catania 8 0 8 Intercity Catania-Agrigento 4 0 4 Fast Regional Palermo-Catania 30 0 30 Regional X. Caltanissetta- Palermo 0 16 16 Regional Catania-Caltanissetta X. 0 12 12 Regional Palermo-Agrigento Lerch Dir.- 0 24 24 Freight Bicocca-Termini Imerese 4 0 4 Total Trains Lerch Dir-Fiumetorto 42 40 82 Total Trains Lerch Dir- Caltanissetta X. (Section 3) 42 16 58 Total Trains Caltanissetta X- Catenanuova 46 12 58 Table 24: Operating Model. Single interoperable rail Figure 51, Figure 52 and Figure 53 represent the operation pattern expected in the first phase with the detail of hypothesized frequency on passenger services and according to the division of services between the new line and existing line. (Italferr E. A., 2018)

Figure 51: Future line train services

Figure 52: New line train services

Figure 53: Existing line train services

4.6.3 Future Rolling Stock The Study of the Palermo- Catania in 2014, it assumed the following types of trains for passenger services:

• Services long distance Intercity (LP): reversible Composition Locomotive E402 B (also loco 414 can be used which has an axle load minor than 402B and compatible with existing line sections) plus 3 carriages with length of 99 meters and a mass of about 200 tons. • Services Regional / metropolitan (R), (RX), (Meter): reversible Composition Locomotive E464 B ( 3 carriages with length of 95 meters a mass of about 180 tons).

For freight services, it has been suggested a composition type trains in single traction with E655 locomotive (for operational today on the Sicily railway network), which happens to be compatible with a maximum gradient of the line of 18 ‰ and a driven mass of 1,300 tons. (Italferr E. A., 2018)

4.6.4 Future Travel Times They have been developed for automatic train simulations with IF-SIM specialized software to estimate the travel time.

The recovery margins times were assumed equal to 5.6 minutes of additional time for every 100 km of driving in accordance with the existing scenario and a very conservative approach.

Here, the services simulated with the speed and travel times:

Fast Regional Service simulated per existing scenario:

• For the gap relating only infrastructural works, it was simulated by the Fast Regional Service, like the existing one (with the same train Minuetto and speed rank), with stops for passenger services in Termini Imerese, Caltanissetta Xirbi, and Enna. Figure 54 below shows the simulation carried out:

Figure 54:Train running simulation- Speed/distance diagram fast regional Service Palermo-Catania in existing line. Stops at Termini Imerese, Caltanissetta X, and Enna- Vertical alignment of the line

The simulated travel time from Palermo to Catania for the scenario with the existing service is equal to 1 hours and 59 minutes. The recovery margin compared to the existing travel time is around 49 minutes.

Long distance service and fast regional as a future scenario for the first functional phase:

To estimate the existing benefits of the project in terms of travel time recovery has been simulated the long distance service with train E402 B, with a stop for passenger services in Enna as shown in Figure 55.

Figure 55: Train running simulation- Speed/distance diagram for Intercity Service Palermo- Catania as future scenario. Stop in Enna- Vertical alignment of the line

The simulated travel time on the route Palermo-Catania for an Intercity service is equal to 1 hour and 49 minutes. Recovery margin compared to existing travel time is 58 minutes and 30 seconds.

The Fast Regional Service was simulated with E464 rolling stock. The service is simulated with stops for passenger services at Termini Imerese, Caltanissetta Xirbi and Enna. Below is the simulation carried out in Figure 56:

Figure 56:Train running simulation- Speed/distance diagram for the Palermo-Catania Regional Fast Service for the future scenario. Stops at Termini Imerese, Caltanissetta X. and Enna- Vertical alignment of the line

Below is a comparison Table 25 between the existing scenario and the scenario "single interoperable binary", for each Section object of study, in relation to:

1. At Fast Regional Service simulated like the present. 2. On the Long-Distance Service, as simulated by the future scenario (train E402 B). (Italferr E. A., 2018)

Palermo- Catania

Fast Regional Travel times existing scenario [hh: mm: ss] 2:48:00 Minuetto Electric Stops: Terms Im., Travel time setting 1st Phase [hh: mm: ss] 2:03:35 Caltanissetta and Enna 0:44:25 X. Delta Travel time from the existing [hh: mm: ss] Fast Regional Travel time setting 1st Phase [hh: mm: ss] 2:00:27 E464 Stops: Terms Im., Caltanissetta and Enna 0:47:33 X. Delta Travel time from the existing [hh: mm: ss] Intercity Travel time setting 1st Phase [hh: mm: ss] 1:50:08 E464 0:57:52 Stops: Enna Delta Travel time from the existing [hh: mm: ss] Table 25: Summary travel times

4.6.5 Future Capacity This section shows the capacity of the estimated results of the new Palermo- Catania link calculated at the UIC 405-1 CHIP R. to perform this analysis, it considered the possibility of a breakdown of traffic between the new line and existing line.

For this study, it was assumed that the new line is dedicated to the movement of the long distance services (Intercity), fast Regional Services and Freight services and the existing rail has maintained the circulation of regional services.

On the new single track line between Fiumetorto and Catenanuova, the highest travel time (critical section), detected through simulations between the various stations of intermediate movement, it is recorded on the route between the stations of Montemaggiore and Lercara of length 17, 61 km.

Figure 57 shows an extract from the spreadsheet on the capacity estimation, in which you can detect all the factors that affect the calculation including the existing operating model that circulates on the line and the existing operating hours. (Italferr E. A., 2018)

Figure 57: Capacity calculation of single track between Fiumetorto and Catenanuova. Single interoperable rail

The capacity of the new fast line between Fiumetorto and Catenanuova was estimated to 56 trains a day.

In the following Table 26 are reported for each section the critical section detected, the pure travel time of the simulated critical section, the capacitance value estimated for the scenario.

Capacity Travel time Operating Model functional Section critical section [train / [Minutes] [Train / day] day] Section 1: 6 min for Long-Distance 8 Intercity Montemaggiore B.- Cerda Fiumetorto- 7 min to Fast Regional 30 Fast Regional 59 (15,3 km) Montemaggiore Belsito 40 min for Freight * 4 Freight Section 2: 6 min for Long-Distance 8 Intercity Montemaggiore B.- Lerch Montemaggiore B.- Dir 7 min to Fast Regional 30 Fast Regional 56 (17.61 km) Lerch 40 min for Freight * 4 Freight Marianopoli PM- PM 5 min for Long-Distance 8 Intercity Section 3: Palomba 6 min for Fast Regional 30 Fast Regional 81 Lerch Dir- Caltanissetta X. (14.21 km) 8 min for Freight 4 Freight 6 min for Long-Distance 12 Intercity Section 4: PM Villarosa- New Enna 7 min to Fast Regional 30 Fast Regional 65 Caltanissetta X- Dittaino (14.9 km) 23 min for Freight ** 4 Freight 5 min for Long-Distance 12 Intercity Section 5: Palomba PM- Catenanuova 5 min to Fast Regional 30 Fast Regional 79 Dittaino- Catenanuova (12,1 km) 20 min for Freight *** 4 Freight * Freight travel time between service locations where freight trains can carry intersections: for Section 1 and 2 is considered traffic capacity Cerda- PM Marcatobianco * Freight travel time between service locations where freight trains can carry intersections: for Section 4 was considered traffic capacity PM Villarosa- Dittaino * Freight travel time between service locations where freight trains can carry intersections: for Section 5 was considered traffic capacity Dittaino PM- PM Sferro Table 26: Estimated Capacity for functional sections for the route to the simple binary between Fiumetorto and Catenanuova. future Scenario

The following Table 27 shows, for each section, the results of the estimation of the existing line capacity and the new fast line with an indication of the operation pattern taken as reference for each route.

Existing line New fast line

Functional Section Capacity(train/day) Capacity(train/day) Operating Operating model(train/day) model(train/day)

Section 1: 69 40 59 42 Fiumetorto-Montemaggiore belsito

Section 2: 53 40 56 42 Montemaggiore B.-Lercara Dir

Section 3: 56 16 81 42 Lercara Dir-Caltanissetta X.

Section 4: 42 12 65 46 Caltanissetta X.-Dittaino

Section 5: 52 12 79 46 Dittaino-Catenanuova

Table 27: Summary of Operating Model and capacity The capacity of the new rail link Fiumetorto - Catenanuova allows the circulation of services provided by the operating model.

On the basis of the exercise model, a time hypothesis was realized which is shown in Figure 58. (Italferr E. A., 2018)

Figure 58:Graphic timetable Fiumetorto – Catenanuova

In next step by selected analysis method, I’m going to do the multicriteria decision making for selection of the best route and evaluation at the end of the selection, summarised in Figure 59:

Determination of the problem Review of literature Analysis Aims and criteria Expert opinion

Determination of the study subject Selection of analysis methods

Determination of alternatives

Using multicriteria analysis methods C A D AHP D1 B 2

The collection of route information Selection of the best route

Figure 59:Selection Methodology

5 Evaluation of scenarios through AHP method-Expert choice Software and Cost-Benefit Analysis: Regarding different solution scenarios and the importance of choosing the optimal one, the method I have been suggested to RFI is AHP Method as explained below:

The Expert Choice software is a multi-objective decision support tool based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) as shown in Figure 60, a mathematical theory first developed at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania by one of Expert Choice's founders, Thomas Saaty (1977).

The AHP is a powerful and comprehensive methodology designed to facilitate sound decision making by using both empirical data as well as subjective judgments of the decision-maker(s). The AHP assists with the decision making the process by providing decision-makers with a structure to organize and evaluate the importance of various objectives and the preferences of Corridor solutions to a decision. (Barfod, 2014)

AnalyticAnalytic Hierarchy Hierarchy Process Process

Step 1: Define Objective

Step 2: Structure element in criteria, sub-criteria, alternatives, etc..

Step 3: Make a pairwise comparison of elements in each group

Step 4:Calculate weighting and consistency ratio

Step 5: Evaluate alternatives according weighting

Get ranking

Figure 60:AHP Phases

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), is an effective tool for dealing with complex decision making and may aid the decision maker to set priorities and make the best decision. By reducing complex decisions to a series of pairwise comparisons, and then synthesizing the results, the AHP helps to capture both

subjective and objective aspects of a decision. In addition, the AHP incorporates a useful technique for checking the consistency of the decision maker’s evaluations, thus reducing the bias in the decision making the process.

The AHP considers a set of evaluation criteria and a set of Corridor options among which the best decision is to be made. It is important to note that, since some of the criteria could be contrasting, it is not true in general that the best option is the one which optimizes every single criterion, rather the one which achieves the most suitable trade-off among the different criteria. The AHP generates a weight for each evaluation criterion according to the decision maker’s pairwise comparisons of the criteria. The higher the weight, the more important the corresponding criterion. Next, for a fixed criterion, the AHP assigns a score to each option according to the decision maker’s pairwise comparisons of the options based on that criterion. The higher the score, the better the performance of the option with respect to the considered criterion. Finally, the AHP combines the criteria weights and the options scores, thus determining a global score for each option, and a consequent ranking (Figure 61). The global score for a given option is a weighted sum of the scores is obtained with respect to all the criteria. (Goepel, 2010)

Figure 61:Rational Decision-Making Process

5.1 Implementation of the AHP Methodology The AHP can be implemented in three simple consecutive Phases:

1. Computing the vector of criteria weights. 2. Computing the matrix of option scores. 3. Ranking the options.

Each Phase will be described in detail in the following. It is assumed that m evaluation criteria are considered, and n options are to be evaluated. A useful technique for checking the reliability of the results will be also introduced.

5.1.1 Computing the vector of criteria weights To compute the weights for the different criteria, the AHP starts creating a pairwise comparison matrix A. The matrix A is a m×m real matrix, where mis the number of evaluation criteria considered. Each entry ajk of the matrix A represents the importance of the jth criterion relative to the kth criterion. If ajk >

1, then the jth criterion is more important than the kth criterion, while if ajk< 1, then the jth criterion is less important than the kth criterion. If two criteria have the same importance, then the entry ajk is 1.

The entries ajk and akj satisfy the following constraint:

ajk.akj=1

Obviously, ajj= 1 for all j. The relative importance between the two criteria is measured according to a numerical scale from 1 to 9, as shown in Table 20, where it is assumed that the jth criterion is equally or more important than the kth criterion. The phrases in the “Interpretation” column of Table 28 are only suggestive and may be used to translate the decision maker’s qualitative evaluations of the relative importance between two criteria into numbers. It is also possible to assign intermediate values which do not correspond to a precise interpretation. The values in the matrix A are by construction pairwise consistent. On the other hand, the ratings may in general show slight inconsistencies. However, these do not cause serious difficulties for the AHP.

Value of ajk Interpretation 1 J and k are equally important 3 J is slightly more important than k 5 J is more important than k 7 J is strongly more important than k 9 J is absolutely more important than k Table 28: Table of relative scores

Once the matrix A is built, it is possible to derive from A the normalized pairwise comparison matrix

Anorm by making equal to 1 the sum of the entries on each column, i.e. each entry ãjk of the matrix Anorm is computed as

Finally, the criteria weight vector w (that is an m-dimensional column vector) is built by averaging the entries on each row of Anorm, i.e.

5.1.2 Computing the matrix of option scores

The matrix of option scores is a n×m real matrix S. Each entry Sij of S represents the score of the ith j option with respect to the jth criterion. To derive such scores, a pairwise comparison matrix B is first built for each of the m criteria, j=1,...,m. The matrix Bj is a n×n real matrix, where n is the number of j j options evaluated. Each entry bih of the matrix B represents the evaluation of the ith option compared j to the hth option with respect to the jth criterion. If bih > 1 , then the ith option is better than the hth j option, while if bih <1, then the ith option is worse than the hth option. If two options are evaluated as j equivalent with respect to the jth criterion, then the entry bih is 1.

j j The entries bih and bhi satisfy the following constraint:

j j bih .bhi =1

j and bii =1for all i. An evaluation scale like the one introduced in Table 20 may be used to translate the decision maker’s pairwise evaluations into numbers.

Second, the AHP applies to each matrix Bj the same two-Phase procedure described for the pairwise- comparison matrix A, i.e.it divides each entry by the sum of the entries in the same column, and then it averages the entries on each row, thus obtaining the score vectors Sj , j=1,.....m. The vector Sj contains the scores of the evaluated options with respect to the jth criterion. Finally, the score matrix S is obtained as

j i.e. the jth column of S corresponds to S .

Remark:

In the considered DSS structure, the pairwise option evaluations are performed by comparing the values of the performance indicators corresponding to the decision criteria. Hence, this Phase of the AHP can be considered as a transformation of the indicator matrix I into the score matrix S.

5.1.3 Ranking the options Once the weight vector w and the score matrix S have been computed, the AHP obtains a vector v of global scores by multiplying S and w, i.e.

The ith entry vi of v represents the global score assigned by the AHP to the ith option. As the final Phase, the option ranking is accomplished by ordering the global scores in decreasing order.

5.1.4 Checking the consistency When many pairwise comparisons are performed, some inconsistencies may typically arise. One example is the following. Assume that 3 criteria are considered, and the decision maker evaluates that the first criterion is slightly more important than the second criterion, while the second criterion is slightly more important than the third criterion. An evident inconsistency arises if the decision maker evaluates by mistake that the third criterion is equally or more important than the first criterion. On the other hand, a slight inconsistency arises if the decision maker evaluates that the first criterion is also slightly more important than the third criterion. A consistent evaluation would be, for instance, that the first criterion is more important than the third criterion. The AHP incorporates an effective technique for checking the consistency of the evaluations made by the decision maker when building each of the pairwise comparison matrices involved in the process, namely the matrix A and the matrices Bj . The technique relies on the computation of a suitable consistency index, and will be described only for the matrix A. It is straight forward to adapt it to the case of the matrices Bj by replacing A with Bj, w with Sj, and m with n. The Consistency Index (CI) is obtained by first computing the scalar x as the average of the elements of the vector whose jth element is the ratio of the jth element of the vector A· w to the corresponding element of the vector w. Then,

A perfectly consistent decision maker should always obtain CI=0, but small values of inconsistency may be tolerated. If

the inconsistencies are tolerable, and a reliable result may be expected from the AHP. RI is the Random Index, i.e. the consistency index when the entries of A are completely random. The values of RI for small problems (m ≤10) are shown in Table 29.

m 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 RI 0 0.58 0.90 1.12 1.24 1.32 1.41 1.45 1.51

Table 29: Values of the Random Index (RI) for small problems

The matrices A corresponding to the cases considered in the above example are shown below, together with their consistency evaluation based on the computation of the consistency index. Note that the conclusions are as expected.

5.1.5 Automating the pairwise comparisons Although every single AHP evaluation is very simple (the decision maker is only required to express how two criteria or Corridors compare to each other), the load of the evaluation task may become unreasonable and tedious for the decision maker when many criteria and Corridors are considered. However, some pairwise-comparisons can be completely or partially automated. A simple method is suggested in the following.

Let the jth criterion be expressed by an attribute which assumes values in the interval [IJ.min, IJ, max], and i h let Ij and Ij be the instances of the attribute under the ith and hth control options, respectively. Assume that the larger the value of the attribute, the better the system performance according to the jth i h, j j criterion. If Ij  Ij the element bih of B can be computed as

A similar expression holds if the smaller the value of the attribute, the better the system performance i h, j j according to the jth criterion. If Ij  Ij the element bih of B can be computed as

100

These two last formulae are linear functions of the difference Iij-Ihj. Of course, More sophisticated functions can be designed by exploiting specific knowledge and/or experience. (Saaty, 1980)

5.1.6 Implementation of AHP method for selection of optimal scenarios in the Sicilian network: In all the infrastructural configuration for the line Palermo-Catania, the result highlights the effectiveness of the layouts proposed and demonstrate the ability of the line upgrades to increase the infrastructural capacity as looked for, since the construction of double track line means 200 trains/day so, this infrastructural configuration able to support the future traffic.

5.2 Result of analysed Corridors (D1, A, B, C, D2) The comparison between scenarios characteristic and infrastructure of the line is summarized in Table 30 (Itelferr, 2015), (RFI, "Enhancement and redevelopment of the railway Messina-Catania- Palermo Itinerary", 2017).

Future Corridor D2 Corridors (Upgrading Existing Existing Corridor Sol. A (Without Sol. B (With New Highway Corridor Line + Construction D1 (SABIR) New Enna) Enna) C Infrastructure of New Rapid Single Configurations Track)

Capacity 200 Trains/Hours 200 Trains/Hours 200 Trains/Hours 200 Trains/Hours 56+45 Trains/Day Maximum Speed 160 – 200 km/h 160 – 200 km/h 160 – 200 km/h 160- 200 km/h 135-200 km/h PA-CT Commercial Intercity Travel 1h 45’ 1h 35’ 1h 36’ 1h 30’ 1h 50' Times (No Stop) 2 (Catenanuova- 2 (Catenanuova- 3 (Strengthening 1 (Catenanuova- N° of Phases New Enna + New Enna + Enna- 5 of Existing Line) Pollina) Enna- Pollina) Fiumetorto) Phase Cost D2+32% D2+70% D2+46% D2+50% D2 7 common N° of Survived Enna- Enna- stations7+ 5 Catenanuova Catenanuova-Enna Stations Catenanuova Catenanuova stations only in existing line8

Table 30: Comparison between the project corridors of the S.d.F

7 Cerda, Montemaggiore B., Lercara dir, Vallelunga, Caltanissetta X., Nuova Enna, Catenanuova 8 Roccapalumba, Valledolmo, Villalba, Villarosa, Enna, Leonforte 101

First Step: I applied the Analytical method as the selection and validation phase to compare among alternatives (with utilizing a few data), the result was the selection of alternative D2.

Second Step: I analysed planning and design phase by Opentrack® simulator, which is able to take into account more elements, to validate my planning, eventually, adjusting the corridor about the optimization of line configuration (e.g. change the position of the station or add one track).

The result of AHP is obtained by Expert choice® through the functions Dynamic in Figure 62, 01-Dec-98 11:24:28 AM Page 1 of 1 Performance in Figure 63, Gradient in Figure 64, Two Dimensional sensitivity analysis graph in Figure 65 with the GoalDynamic to select Sensitivity the best forcorridor. nodes below: Goal: Selection of the best corridor

01-Dec-98 11:23:52 AM Page 1 of 1

Performance Sensitivity for nodes below: Goal: Selection of the best corridor Figure 62:Dynamic SensitivityObjectives for nodes, Names Goal: Selection of the best corridor

Capacity Capacity Speed Speed Travel time Travel time N of phases N of phases Phase cost Phase cost N of survive N of survived stations

Alternatives Names

D1 D1 C C

B B Figure 63:PerformanceObjectives SensitivityNames for nodes A A

CapacityD2 D2 Capacity Speed Speed Travel time Travel time N of phases N of phases Phase cost Phase cost N of survive N of survived stations 102

www.p30download.com Alternatives Names

D1 D1 C C B B A A D2 D2

www.p30download.com

01-Dec-98 11:24:55 AM Page 1 of 1

Gradient Sensitivity for nodes below: Goal: Selection of the best corridor

01-Dec-98 11:23:12 AM Page 1 of 1 Two Dimentional Sensitivity for nodes below: Goal: Selection of the best Figure 64:GradientObjectives Sensitivity Names for nodes corridor

Capacity Capacity Speed Speed Travel time Travel time N of phases N of phases Phase cost Phase cost N of survive N of survived stations

Alternatives Names

D1 D1 C C

B B Figure 65:Two-Dimensional Sensitivity for nodes A A Objectives Names D2 D2 Among the Capacity objectives, thereCapacity was the possibility of sharing the corridors by realization phase, the corridor D2 hasSpeed a unique Speedadvantage, on the construction phase, while the other corridors only can be divided into Traveltwo or time threeTravel phases, time therefore, for example, the 5 Billions € construction cost should be divided into N2 ofpart, phases but inN corridor of phases D2 you can divide the corridor in n° of phases you can decide, and build it stationPhase by station, cost Phasebasing cost on the money you have. www.p30download.com N of survive N of survived stations It costs more at the end, but you can do this stepwise, depending on the money you have and you always hook with existing line, it means Alternatives that in each Names construction phase because of existence of junctions between existing and future line, there is the possibility to use new line, so, the concept is that, if I buildD1 a newD1 corridor near to existing line, as I build immediately, I have a benefit and save the capacity andC the trackC that you build in each phase has beneficial feedback on the Palermo-Catania link (you have anB expenseB for construction of each phase and a benefit that will come back to you immediately),A becauseA the invariant is not completely out, instead for other corridors when the D2 D2 103

www.p30download.com

invariant is completely out, until I build it all there is no beneficial result till the end of construction of all and till finalize it you won’t have any benefit and feedback of new line. It is important for other corridors except D2, you should have all the budget for construction of the new line, if not, you won’t be possible to make it, but on D2 should you have a % of the totale budget, you will construct that % of line and use it immediately.

It results that with lower prices in axle X and lower higher benefit in axle Y, the best solution will be corridor D2.

Cost-Benefit analysis results are in Figure 66 and data by corridors are in Table 31; the selected route is D2 with benefits below.

AHP- Cost vs. Benefit 35%

30% D2 25%

20% B A C

15% D1 Benefit 10%

0% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% Relative Costs

Figure 66:Cost-Benefit Analysis

Alternatives Benefit Cost D1 18.80% 15% A 21% 35% B 21% 19% C 16.90% 21% D2 26.70% 10% Table 31: Cost-Benefit data

104

In the following the pros and cons of the selected scenario are under consideration:

1. Share the investment in small parts. 2. Keep existing stations in service, not abandon the existing passenger services, which is a good advantage because also the inhabitants are used to go in these stations and if you eliminate them, there will be a rebellion by population and municipality, above all if the corridor or the station has an international, regional and local value. 3. Other corridors serves substantially only Palermo-Enna-Catania link, whereas corridor D2 serves also smaller towns with more stations used by more population: the other corridors capacity is 200 trains/day but the maximum capacity will be never utilized never (the max use will be a bit more than 100 trains/day between existing and future line. 4. Offering the number of trains per day should be considered regarding the number of inhabitants from Palermo to Catania Table 32: 5. Inhabitants Palermo 668,405 Catania 311,620 Table 32:Total population of Palermo-Catania

The population relationship analysis was done by demand transport studies state that the maximum required capacity is 100 trains per day, finally, I should have enough capacity to serve the trains that are planned in the future. The operation model offering 56 trains/day, which link to the analysis and study on population, tourist cans seasonal and the result of these study says that the future need will be 55 trains/day, therefore, in multicriteria analysis, the capacity of more than 100 trains/day will be a negative value. The solution will be selected by an operation analysis by a simulation software.

105

6 Operation Methodology and Opentrack® Software This part of the study is for the application of a simulation method carried out with the user defined input data. Predefined trains move on a defined track layout on the conditions of the timetable data. OpenTrack uses a mixed discrete/continuous simulation process that calculates both the continuous numerical solution of the differential motion equations for the vehicles (trains) and the discrete processes of signal box states and delay distributions. A wide variety of output data is developed in the simulation process. (Nash, 2004) The analysis phases of Opentrack® has done on the thesis are synthesized in the scheme of Figure 67 :

Figure 67:Schematization of the analysis methodology Phases

In other words, the Opentrack® is a microscopic model that simulates rail system operations based on the user-defined train, infrastructure and timetable databases. The software simulates the behaviour of all railway elements (infrastructure network, rolling stock and timetable, Figure 68) as well as the iterative processes among them to evaluate changes in each of these elements and optimize the system as a whole (Italferr, "ETCs technical report", 2018)

106

Figure 68:Iterative process to optimize the system as a whole

It can be used to test the stability of a new timetable evaluate the benefits of different long-term infrastructure improvement programs and analysing the impact of different rolling stock.

Figure 69 illustrates how the simulation tool works. Predefined trains run on a railway network according to the timetable. During the simulation OpenTrack calculates train movements under the constraints of the timetable and the signalling system. After a simulation run, OpenTrack can analyse and display the resulting data in the form of diagrams, train graphs, occupation diagrams and statistics. (Nash, 2004)

Figure 69: The modules of simulation by Opentrack®

107

6.1 Input data: 6.1.1 Rolling Stock: Rolling stock data stores each locomotive technical characteristic (Table 33, Table 34, Table 35) including tractive effort/speed diagrams, load, length, adhesion factor, and electrical system (RFI, "Fascicolo linea 155", 2003), (RFI, "Fascicolo linea 157", 2003), (RFI, "Prefazione generale all'orario di servizio", edizione 1963 ristampa 2007).

Rolling stock E402B

Wheel diameter 1.250 m

Length 18.440 m

Width 3.000 m

Height 4.235 m

Power type Electric

Loco weight 89t

Electric system 3000 V DC, 15 Kv 162/3 Hz AC, 25 kV AC

Traction motors AC series

Max speed 200 km/h

Power output 6000 kW

Traction effort 280 kN

Table 33: Rolling stock E402B technical characteristics

108

Rolling stock E464

Wheel diameter 1.250 m

Wheel base 7.540 m between bogies / 2.650 m between axles in each bogie Length 15.750 m

Width 3.000 m

Height 4.100 m

Power type Electric

Loco weight 72 t

Electric system 3000 V DC

Traction motors Three phases asynchronous

Max speed 160 km/h

Power output 3.5 MW

Tractive effort 200KN

Table 34:Rolling stock E464 technical characteristics

Freight E655

Wheel diameter 1.250 m

Length 18.29 m

Width 3.00 m

Height 3.80 m

Loco weight 120 t

Electric system 3000 V DC Catenary

Traction motors DC

Max speed 120 km/h

Power output Continuous:4200 kw / one hour: 4800 kw

Tractive effort 300 KN

Table 35: Rolling stock E655 technical characteristics

109

Figure 70, is inserted the phase of the new line as an assumption for types of trains:

Figure 70:Future operation model of Palermo-Catania

The green line is showing a freight train that starts from Termini Imerese and continues to Bicocca.

The blue line concern 36 Regional Fast trains with the frequency 1/60' from Palermo C.le to Catania C.le, in addition there are 16 regional trains from Palermo C.le to Cerda and 24 regional trains with frequency 1/60' and 16 regional train from Catanenuova to Catania C.le with frequency 1/120'.

The red line represents 12 intercity trains from Palermo C.le to Catania C.le and 4 Intercity trains from Agrigento that, respect to our study line, start from Caltanissetta C.le to Catania C.le.

Regarding the timetable in Table 36 there are the number and type of trains.

110

Type of trains N° of trains

Intercity 21 IC

Freight 7 M

Fast Regional 36 RV

Intercity 4 IC C from Caltanissetta

Table 36: Number and type of trains The neglibile amount of freight trains with respect to passenger trains shows their scheduling flexibility. The train E402B is suitable as Intercity and Intercity from Caltanissetta, regarding IF-SIM graph, the speed limit coincides with a max speed of simulation which is 200 km/h (from Enna to Cerda), the rest of distance have the lower speed and min speed the line will be 100 km/h.

IF-SIM simulated speed-distance diagram for E402B from Catania to Palermo with 231,637 km distance and travel time of 1h46’ and average speed of 149 km/h with 4 stops: Palermo-Cerda-Enna-Catania as shown in Figure 71:

Figure 71:IF-SIM simulated speed/distance diagram- Vertical alignment of the line

111

The tractive force versus the speed for vehicles equipped with an asynchronous engine: the electrical power is 6017 kW and the resistance is 15 N/t.

The acceleration depends on the difference between the traction force and the resistance to motion, it is variable with the speed. Traction characteristic T of the vehicle, resistances R to motion and acceleration force (T-R) shows in Figure 72:

Figure 72:Traction Effort

Train E464 operates along the Palermo-Catania line as Fast Regional, regarding IF-SIM, the speed limit is 200km/h but the speed of train E464 on this is 160 km/h with 5 stops: Palermo- Cerda-Caltanissetta- Enna-Catania.

IF-SIM simulated speed-distance diagram for train E464 is shown in Figure 73 with travel time of 1h:8’ and average speed of 131.8 km/h.

112

Figure 73:IF-SIM simulated speed/distance diagram- Vertical alignment of the line

The tractive force versus speed for vehicles equipped with an asynchronous engine: the electrical power is 3022 kW and resistance is 14 N/t.

The acceleration depends on the difference between the traction force and the resistance to motion. The acceleration is variable with the speed. Traction characteristic T of the vehicle, resistances R to motion and acceleration force (T-R) are in Figure 74:

Figure 74:Traction effort

113

The freight train on the new line Palermo-Catania is pulled by E655, regarding IF-SIM the limit speed is 140 km/h and the simulated maximum speed of freight train is 120 km/h with ywo stops: Palermo- Catania shown in Figure 75:

Figure 75:Train running simulation- Speed/distance diagram- Vertical alignment of the line

The tractive force versus the speed for vehicles equipped with an asynchronous engine: the electrical power is 3778 kW and the resistance is 18 N/t.

114

Figure 76:Traction effort

The timetable from Palermo to Catania is basing on the average headway and the range of delays are for managing the trains out of the planned timetable. Obviously, the freight trains have more flexibility regarding delay associated to them (Table 37).

Type of trains N° of trains Average Average Small delay Medium delay Large delay Headway Headway P-C C-P

Intercity 21 IC 1:20:00 1:20:00 60 90 120

Freight 7 M 90 120 150

Fast Regional 36 RV 1:35:00 30:00 60 90 120

Intercity 4 IC C 60 90 120 Caltanissetta

Table 37: Assumption of timetable

6.1.2 Infrastructural Data The railway network is represented by means of a schematization defined double vertex graph within a work environment defined Worksheet. The framework of the graphic representation includes elements called Vertices and Edges. The vertices are points in the railway network where at least one route attribute changes (as gradient, speed, etc.) or where there is a signal. Vertices appear in pairs to provide information at each vertex about the edge, via which to reach the vertex. By means of a palette called Vertex Inspector, it is possible to insert Name, Kilometre Point, Station Sign and Station Vertex (meaning that the vertex is the reference point of station position). Edges are lines symbolizing railroad track segments. With the inspector palette, it is possible to give them attributes: length, radius and gradient. Normally, it is possible to calculate automatically the distances. Each edge has its

115

direction: it is important to indicate gradient, radius and line speed attributes. The best solution to adopt is to maintain the same direction for all the edges. According to the train category, it is possible to insert the line speed per direction. Information about speed and section length should be done by infrastructure manager documentation.

The first Phase is to extract infrastructure data from the profile and planimetry of each section to have information about the position of curves, the position of the tunnel and its type, vertex name and kilometre in direction of even and odd, gradient, radius, station name.

In Table 38 I have extracted the km of each station in both directions, starting point and final point of curves and tunnels, speed in each section of the line in both direction from profile and planimetry of the line (The speed if different Rank A, B, C, P calculated by excel file of RFI group). The location of signals analysed in the following.

Table 38:The infrastructure characteristic of future project

116

Figure 77 shows the second Phase to calculate the correct speed according to rules of:

o The speed can be changed every 2 km o V  60 km/h in decreasing both for even and odd direction.

Fiumetorto-Catenanuova 250

200 200 200 200 200 200 200 180 160 160 160 160 160 160 145 145 145 145 145150 150 140 140 140 120 125 120 120 100 100 60 50

42.148 44.148 46.247 53.185 55.959 61.262 63.417 74.903 79.823 82.238 85.057 93.210

134.418 103.536 115.172 124.373 126.373 128.373 137.129 140.287 150.216 153.671 159.534 162.737 169.075 172.624 177.693 101.536 Figure 77:Speed of train Fiumetorto-Catenanuova even direction

Here is clear in direction of even from the kilometre of 85.057 till 93.210, between PM Marcatobianca and Vallelunga Station, the speed decreasing from 200 km/h to 120 km/h as identified by orange colour in Figure 78and we should modify it:

Fiumetorto-Catenanuova 250 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 180 180 160 160 160 160 160 160 145 145 145 145 145150 150 140 140 140 120 125 120 120 100 100 60 50

91.21 93.21

42.148 44.148 46.247 53.185 55.959 61.262 63.417 79.823 82.238 85.057

101.536 102.843 115.172 124.373 125.788 128.371 134.418 137.129 140.287 150.216 153.671 159.534 162.737 169.075 172.624 177.693

74.902636 Figure 78:Modification of speed Fimetorto-Catenanuova even direction

117

According to both rules, the speed change is perfectly performed. Now we can control the direction of odd ( Figure 79):

Odd-Fiumetorto-Catenanuova 250

200 200 200 200 200 200 200 180 160 160 160 160 160 160 150145 145 145 145 145 150 140 140 140 120 120 125 120 100 100

61.262 55.959 93.210 85.057 82.238 79.823 74.903 63.417 53.185 46.247

177.693 172.624 169.075 162.737 159.534 153.671 150.216 140.287 137.129 134.418 128.373 126.373 124.373 115.172 103.536 101.536 190.056 Figure 79:Speed of Fiumetorto-Catenanuova odd direction

In this direction the rules are justified.

The third phase was related to adjusting signalling system regarding to four types of signals in Opentrack®:

1. Protection signals=Home signals 2. Line signals= Block signals 3. Departure signals=Exit signals 4. Advance signals= Distance signals

According to the layout of stations, the protection and departure signals are located with respect to Standards and decision of professionalism of RFI group, on how the protection signals are located 200 m before the switches and departure signals located 20 m after platform for each direction. The data for the signalling system of Fiumetorto-Cerda has given by Italferr group calculation.

118

I have calculated Distance and Block signals and the number of track circuit between the stations in excel file, in this method the number and kilometre of the block and advanced signals for each section are identified in even direction in Table 39 in even direction and in odd direction in Table 40 (RFI, "Regolamento per la circolazione dei treni", 1962), (RFI, "Regolamento sui segnali", 1947), (FS group, 1984), (European Commission, "Regulations:Technical specification for interoperability relating to the ‘control-command and signalling’ subsystems of the rail system in the European Union", 2016).

Even direction

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4 Block 5

circuit circuit circuit circuit circuit circuit circuit circuit N.circuit circuito STAZION N.Bloc Bloc circuito di circuito di circuito di o di circuito di circuito di circuito di o di o di o di o di o di o di o di N.Advanc Advance Advanc Advanc Advanc sparte sprote Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 o di di Advance 1 E k k 4 binario 1 binario 2 binario 3 binario binario 1 binario 2 binario 3 binario binario binario binario binario binario binario e 2 e 3 e 4 e 5 binario binario 4 5 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Fiu-Cer 43333 44064 0 43333 0 43333 1 43333 50059.33 54715.66 Cer-Mon 45403 59372 3 59372 3 3 3 7 46955 48507 50059 51611 53163 54715 56267 57819 59372 48507 53163 57819

Mon-Ler 60462 76818 3 65914 71366 76818 4 61825 63188 64551 65914 67277 68640 70003 71366 72729 74092 75455 76818 3 64551 70003 75455

Ler-Marc 77517 81803 1 81803 3 78945 80374 81803 1 80374 92414.87 Marc-Val 82796 93789 2 88292.5 93789 4 2 84170 85544.25 86918.375 88292.5 89666.625 91040.75 92414.875 93789 86918.375 5 10264 10264 Val-Mari 94943 1 102643 5 1 3 96483 98023 99563 101103 3 101103 Mari- 10350 11680 11680 11384 11532 11680 3 107939 112372 3 3 Mimi 6 5 5 104983 106461 107939 109416 110894 112372 9 7 5 106461 110894 115327 11783 12402 Mimi-Cal 1 124027 4 1 7 7 119384.5 120932 122479.5 124027 122479.5 12503 13576 Cal-Vil 2 130400 135761 4 2 9 1 126379.25 127719.5 129059.75 130400 131740.25 133080.5 134420.75 129059.75 133080.5 13655 15070 15070 14755 14913 15070 Vil-En 3 141270 145987 3 3 3 4 4 138125 139697 141270 142842 144414 145987 9 1 4 139697 144414 149131 15153 16400 153090.62 154649.2 156207.87 157766. 159325.12 160883.7 162442.37 16400 En-Dit 2 157766.5 164001 4 2 2 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 156207 162442 16400 17610 165514.12 167027.2 168540.37 170053. 171566.62 173079.7 174592.87 17610 168540.37 Dit-Rad 2 170053.5 176106 4 2 1 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 5 174592 17769 17845 Rad-Cate 0 177693 0 1 3 5 178455 178455 Table 39: Number and location of the block signal and distance signal in even direction

Block 4 Block 3 Block 2 Block 5 Block 4 Block 3

circuito circuito circuito circuito circuito circuito circuito circuito circuito circuito Block N.circuito circuito di circuito di circuito di di circuito di circuito di di di di di di di di Advance Advance Advance STAZIONE sparte sprote N.Block Block 4 Block 3 Block 2 di di N.Advance 1 di binario binario 5 binario 4 binario 3 binario binario 2 binario 3 binario binario binario binario binario binario binario 1 2 3 binario 2 binario 5 1 2 1 5 2 3 2 1

Cate-Rad 179300 177997 0 179300 1 177997 1 177997

Rad-Dit 176410 165689 2 171049.5 165689 3 174623 172836 171049.5 169262 167475 165689 2 172836 167475

Dit-En 165015 151975 2 158495 151975 5 163711 162407 161103 159799 158495 157191 155887 154583 153279 151975 2 159799 153279

En-Vil 151141 137132 3 146471.33 141801.67 137132 3 149584 148027 146471 144914 143358 141801 140245 138688 137132 3 148027 143358 138688

Vil-Cal 136163 125610 2 130886.5 125610 4 134843.875 133524.75 132205.6 130886.5 129567.3 128248.25 126929.1 125610 2 132205.6 126929.1

Cal-Mimi 124649 118138 1 118138 5 123346.8 122044.6 120742.4 119440.2 118138 1 119440.2 Mimi- 117447 103977 3 112957 108467 103977 3 3 Mari 115950 114453 112957 111460 109963 108467 106970 105473 103977 114453 109963 105473

Mari-Val 103115 95501 1 95501 5 101592.2 100069.4 98546.6 97023.8 95501 1 97023.8

Val-Marc 94553 83108 2 88830.5 83108 4 93122.375 91691.75 90261.125 88830.5 87399.8 85969.25 84538.625 83108 2 90261.125 84538.625 Marc-Ler 82115 77976 1 77976 3 1 80735 79355 77976 79355 Ler-Mon 77227 60881 3 71778.3 66329.6 60881 4 75864 74502 73140.5 71778.3 70416 69054 67691 66329 64967.5 63605.3 62243.1 60881 3 73140.5 67691 62243

Mon-Cer 60172 45983 3 55442.3 50712.6 45983 3 58595 57018 55442.3 53865 52289 50712 49136 47559 45983 3 57018 52289 47559

Cer-Fiu 45099 43727 0 45099 1 43727 1 43727 Table 40: The number and location of block and distance signal in an odd direction

119

6.1.3 Timetable The timetable database stores information for each train at each station, including arrival and departure times, minimal stop time, and connections to other trains. (RFI, "Opentrack: Simulation of railway network")

6.2 Simulation During a simulation, trains try to perform the given timetable. The differential equations for speed and distance are the basis for calculating a train’s movement.

After the construction of the network, it is necessary to insert signalling system. A signal is assignable to a vertex only. There are different typologies and functions of signals that the software proposes:

• Typologies: main signal, distant signal or main/distant signal. • Functions: home signal (protection signal), exit signal or block signal. • Approaching speed and running speed imposed by the signal. • Visibility distance.

The signalling of the railway network poses constraints. Occupied tracks and restrictive signal aspects may impede a train’s progress. The simulation can be watched in an animation mode, which shows the trains running and lets the user analyse occupied tracks, reserved tracks and signal aspects. (RFI, "Opentrack: Simulation of railway network")

The animation of simulation of new line with software Opentrack® in Figure 80 has run after inserting the infrastructural and technical characteristic of new corridor:

120

Figure 80: Simulation animation of the new line with Opentrack® software

The simulation shows the effect of conflicts and propagation of delays trough the network. (Italferr, "ETCs technical report", 2018)

6.3 Output Data: After a simulation, OpenTrack® offers output data in several forms. Evaluations of trains, lines or stations are possible. For a train, OpenTrack® offers diagrams such as acceleration vs. distance and speed vs. distance. For a line, there are diagrams of train movements, track occupation and line profiles. Every station produces output about all the trains using it, including arrival, stopping and departure times, such as platform occupation diagram and delay statistics. (European Commission, "TENtec Interactive Map Viewer", 2019), (RFI, "Opentrack: Simulation of railway network").

The analysis focuses on the new Palermo-Catania line simulation, regarding four types of service trains (RV, M, IC C, IC). In addition to the planned scenario, three different options have been developed and analysed on how we insert failures and try to catch the originally planned time table. Table 41 summarizes different scenarios:

121

Option 1 Survey of entering freight trains after RV peak periods during the day

Option 2 Adjustment of simulated planned timetable as a reference time table: freight trains not considered as main traffic

Option 3 Survey about an accident in the station of Lercara: freight trains not considered as main traffic

Option 4 Survey about an accident in the route between Cerda and Montemaggiore: freight trains not considered as main traffic

Table 41: Various Scenarios

6.3.1 Result of Simulated Options by Opentrack® Priority trains followed strictly the timetable and slower trains will be selecting the best location for the siding allowing a scheduled train to pass. (Hellman, 2003)

The planned timetable are compared to the simulated timetable graph with all trains of the section for both directions. Horizontal lines show the time, stations and passing point are shown along the Y axis in Figure 81. (Italferr, "ETCs technical report", 2018)

Figure 81:Train graph, Simulated and planned path

The time table is planned with freight trains9 operation starting at 4:30 to prevent conflicts with other trains during peak periods, the fast regional trains start working at 5:30, the Palermo-Catania average

9 Freight trains are slower thay R, RV and IC 122

headway is 1:35:00 and the peak headway 30:00. The Intercity trains will start working at 7:00 with an average headway of 1:20:00 and stops at Caltanissetta Xirbi. After the last departure of fast regional train, the operation of freight starts again between 20:00 and 23:10. In Figure 82 the Passengers trains are sharper and faster than freight trains. The performance of the simulated paths faithfully reproduces the planned path. The freight trains are not stopping in the stations and the passing stations are approximately located every 25 km.

As is shown in Figure 83, the bigger occupation time is from Fiumetorto to PM Maria, which has not a suitable station for passing freight trains. The rest of the line has suitable passing stations to prevent conflicts with trains coming from the opposite direction.

Figure 82:reference timetable

123

Figure 83: reference occupation time

6.3.1.1 Option 1: Freight trains operated after the end of operation of fast regional trains.

Generally, traffic management rules consider faster trains overlaid on a flow of slower trains reducing network performance for both double and single track networks. Moreover, traffic management relies on simulations of railway traffic to test policies and evaluate track changes (Beck, 2008)

Adjustment of simulated and planned timetable are in Figure 84; the conflicts are from 14:00 to 17:00 and the trains become again on-time in Figure 85; in the station Vallelunga from 16:25 to 16:50 a relevant delay for RV is caused by freight train.

124

Figure 84: timetable option 1

Figure 85: timetable option 1 with one freight train

125

6.3.1.2 Option 2 Making the simulation of the new line, adjustment of simulated and planned timetable shows the results below:

1. 56 trains planned on the line, are verified; 2. The layout configuration is correct; 3. The analysis with Opentrack® point out that freight train should run during night time, so without modifying the configuration layout of line, it is enough to make some changes in operational level (operation of freight train shifted to night). The congruity of planned and simulated paths is showed in Figure 86.

The occupied times are shown in Figure 87; in general, the analysis by Opentrack® demonstrates that the obtained results are satisfactory both in the planning and design phases.

Figure 86: timetable option 2

126

Figure 87: Occupation time option 2

6.3.1.3 Option 3 Controlling the disruption situation in the station (e.g. should an accident happen in the station of Lercara).

Adjustment of simulated and planned timtables are in Figure 88; if the planned timetable is before the simulated one it means that the train is late, otherwise it is earlier than the simulated one.

Figure 88: Timetable option 3

127

Investigation on accident from 12:00 to 17:00 until the trains will become on-time in Figure 89 demonstrates the duration of time, the accident has happened, the planned itinerary has little differences, the simulated path is delayed and slower with respect to the planned one. This happened only for some paths in a period before 17:00.

Figure 89: Train graph planned and simulated paths in option 3

The green path, IC10, has no stop in stations and run but, from 13:30 till 13:50, the simulated train is slower than planned one and after 14:10 it will become faster, also, there are some cases where it must stop in station for overtaking RV11 trains.

The blue path shows the biggest disruption for RV is happening in from 13:10 till 14:15 between stations of Dittaino and Montemaggiore where simulated train is slower than planned one.

6.3.1.4 Option 4 Controlling when a section of line is not available for whatever reason (e.g. if an accident happens between Cerda and Montemaggiore), the trains should run on the alternative route of the disrupted one).

The train graph shows the effect of route disruption and the delay in Figure 90.

After the period from 12:00 to 17:00 the trains will become on-time as in the train graph of the critical section Cerda-Montemaggiore in Figure 91.

10 Intercity 11 Regionale veloce= Regional fast 128

The green path is showing the most critical situation for IC trains: start from PM Mimiani S.Cataldo at 12:40 and running faster than planned.

The blue path is highly affected by accident from 14:30 to 15:50 and the planned train is faster than simulated.

Figure 90: Train graph option 4

Figure 91: Timetable during an accident

129

7 Results The result is summarised according to Table 42.

Typology of Track Existing scenario Future scenario(existing and new binary) Single track Doubling track Rolling Stock Minuetto Electrico 501-502 E655- E402(414)- E464 Operating Model Palermo- Catania 12 Fast Regional Services Palermo- Catania on the new line 8 Intercity Services Catenanuova- Catania 2 Regional Services Catania- Agrigento on the new line. 4 Intercity Services Caltanissetta X.- Catania 10Regional Services Catania- Caltanissetta on the existing line 12 Regional Services Caltanissetta X.-Roccapalumba 8 Regional Services Palermo- Catania on the new line 30 Regional fast Services Agrigento- Roccapalumba- Caltanissetta C 1 Regional Service Caltanissetta C.le - Caltanissetta X- Palermo of existing line 16 Regional Services Palermo-Lercara- Agrigento 24 Regional Services Lerch-Palermo-Agrigento on the existing line 24 Regional Services Bicocca-termini Imerese on the new line 4 Freight Services Capacity(trains/day) Fiumetorto- Lerch 36(trains/day) Fiumetorto- Lerch 82 (42 of new line and 40 on the existing line) Section 3 Lerch Branch- Caltanissetta Xirbi 21(trains/day) Section 3 Lerch Branch- Caltanissetta Xirbi 58 (42 of new line and 16 on the existing line) Caltanissetta Xirbi- Catenanuova 22(trains/day) Caltanissetta Xirbi- Catenanuova 58 (46 of new line and 12 on the existing line) Travel time 2':59" 1':50" Critical section Montemaggiore- Sciara 9,9 km Montemaggiore – Cerda 15,3 km Capacity of critical section*estimated with application of UIC 405-1 FICHE R Fiumetorto- Catenanuova 42 trains/ day Fiumetorto- Catenanuova 101 trains/day (42 existing line, and 56 new line) Maximum Gradient 31‰ 18‰ Speed (min-max) 70-130km/h 135-200 km/h Signalling Systems Automatic block-Axle counter ERTMS, ETCS Radius (m) 315 660 Table 42: The result table

• The capacity of existing line is bigger than the capacity of new fast line only for Section 1. UIC standard 405-1/R estimates the line capacity over the daily operation period T determined by the section (between two service points) with greater occupancy time. • In the new line, when Sciara is disrupted, the section longer occupancy time is longer than in the existing line; therefore the capacity is lower. • The future scenario of the fast rail link Palermo-Catania, which provides an overall configuration of the rail link between Fiumetorto and Catenanuova, two single tracks (existing + new) lead to improve the existing scenario in terms of travel time and capacity. • The existing scenario is constituted by a simple infrastructure in which the traffic is remotely managed by the Control Center and the signalling is including axle-counter with SCMT. • The capacity of the new rail link Fiumetorto-Catenanuova allows the operation of services provided by the timetable.

130

8 Conclusions This study elaborates a general model for the analysis of railway infrastructure improvements. Different methodologies are combining in a rational integration, by evaluating, modifying and innovating them with the aim to fulfil the requirements and achieve the objectives.

The analysis reported in this Master Thesis highlights that the supply of services is not adequated to the demand of mobility because of low capacity, low speed and high travel time due to the condition of existing infrastructure. The absence of competitiveness of rail services with road services is another reason for the dissatisfaction generating the need of relevant improvements. Considering the need to adequate European Corridors to Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSI) and the forecast of future mobility demand, the setup of a new line is a consequence of the poor performances of the existing infrastructure layout of this line, unfit to support the expected traffic.

Based on the analysis conducted on several corridors, the multicriteria analysis (Table 42) indicates the effectiveness of corridor D2 as the most effective future scenario, which includes the following pros and cons.

• Disadvantages versus alternative scenarios: o Higher cost; o Moderate travel time reduction; o Long-time plan (multi-annual action plan). • Advantages versus alternative scenarios: o Better financing program over time; o Multiple construction phases; o Progressive benefits acquired after the construction of each section; o Larger catchment area for stations; o Integration with the existing line taking advantage thanks to the interconnection, especially in disruption situations; o Improvement of the capacity by eliminating the main bottlenecks; o Possibility to introduce new Palermo-Catania services to be planned with the agreement between the regional government, the railway operator and the railway infrastructure.

The methodology, based on the use of the Opentrack® simulator, demonstrated that the operation of future line will be satisfactory, with the Fiumetorto-Catenanuova new section analysed also in various disrupted conditions.

This study demonstrates the importance of research, innovative and creative planning and decision making to select the most effective scenario, aimed to boost the competitiveness of the Sicilian railway network with a faster and less costly transition to a more attractive, user-friendly, efficient and sustainable European rail system and to its development according to TSI standards.

131

9 Bibliography Abril, M. e. (2008). "An assessment of railway capacity." . Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 44.5, 774-806.

Armstrong, J. e. (2011). "Developing a CUI-based approach to network capacity assessment.". 4th International Seminar on Railway Operations Modelling and Analysis.

Associates, K. (2003). “Transit Cooperative Research Program, and Transit Development Corporation.”. In T. R. Board, Transit capacity and quality of service manual (p. No. 100).

Barfod, M. B. (2014). "Graphical and technical options in Expert Choice for group decision making.".

Barter, W. A. (2008). "ERTMS Level 2: Effect On Capacity Compared With\“best Practice” Conventional Signalling." . WIT Transactions on The Built Environment 103 , (pp. 213-222).

Beck, V. (2008). “Manager Operations Planning, CSX Transportation, Personal Communication”.

Castiello, E. (2016). “Speeding up and Doubling Station Capacity of Biccoca- Catenanuova.” Master thesis. Rome: Torvergata University.

Connor, P. (2012). "Understanding the factors affecting capacity limits for a highspeed railway". In "High Speed Railway Capacity.".

European Commission. (2014). "Regulations: Technical specifications for interoperability relating to the ‘infrastructure’ subsystem of the rail system in the European Union". https://www.era.europa.eu/.

European Commission. (2016). "Regulations:Technical specification for interoperability relating to the ‘control-command and signalling’ subsystems of the rail system in the European Union". https://www.era.europa.eu/.

European Commission. (2019). "TENtec Interactive Map Viewer". http://ec.europa.eu/.

FS group, G. G. (1984). "La progettazione degli impianti acei parte 1 il piano schematico.". CIFI, 31-38.

FS Group, P. G. "La circolabilita del traffico merci combinato su rete ferroviaria italiana".

FS Group, R.-F.-A. I. (2010-2011). New connection Palermo-Catania.

Gašparík, J. a. (2010). "A new approach to estimating the occupation time of the railway infrastructure." . Transport 25.4, 387-393.

Gašparík, J. B. (2015). "New graphical approach to railway infrastructure capacity analysis." . PROMET- Traffic&Transportation 27.4 , 283-290.

Goepel, K. (2010). "AHP-Business performance management".

132

Hansen, I. A. (2008). "Railway timetable & traffic: analysis, modelling, simulation". Eurailpress.

Harrod, S. (2009). "Capacity factors of a mixed speed railway network.". In Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 45.5 (pp. 830-841).

Hellman, B. C. (2003). Trains 63.1 . In "Santa Fe Sentinels." (pp. 50-50).

Italferr. "Scenari d’intervento per il potenziamento infrastrutturale Palermo-Catania finalizzato alla realizzazione del corridoio europeo n.5 helsinki – valletta".

Italferr. (2009). "New connection Palermo-Catania".

Italferr. (2012). "Studio feasibility of the new connection Palermo-Catania".

Italferr. (2018). "ETCs technical report".

Italferr, A. P. (2013). "Potenziamento infrastrutturale del collegamento Palermo-Catania". Rome: Italferr.

Italferr, E. A. (2018). "Nuovo collegamento Palermo – Catania". Rome: Italferr.

Italferr, P. P. Introduction to railway project. Rome: Italferr.

Itelferr. (2015). "Enhancement and Redevelopment of the Railway Messina- Catania- Palermo Itinerary".

Kaas, A. H. (1998). "Methods to calculate capacity of railways." . Institute for Planning, Technical University of Denmark .

Kahan, A. M. (1979). "Railway capacity analysis and related methodology .". Ottawa/Hull, Canada: Canadian transport commission.

Kontaxi, E. a. (2012). "Railway capacity handbook: a systematic approach to methodologies." . Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 48 , 2689-2696.

Krueger, H. (1999). "Parametric modeling in rail capacity planning." . Simulation-A Bridge to the Future'(Cat. No. 99CH37038). Vol. 2. IEEE. WSC'99. 1999 Winter Simulation Conference Proceedings.'.

Landex, A. A. (2008). "Methods to estimate railway capacity and passenger delays". Technical University of Denmark (DTU).

Landex, A. e. (2006). "Evaluation of railway capacity.". Trafikdage/Trafficdays.

Marinov, M. e. (2013). "Railway operations, time-tabling and control." . Research in Transportation Economics 41.1, 59-75.

133

Nash, A. a. (2004). "Railroad simulation using OpenTrack.". WIT Transactions on The Built Environment 74 .

Pouryousef, H. P. (2015). "Railroad capacity tools and methodologies in the US and Europe.". Journal of Modern Transportation 23.1 , 30-42.

RFI. "Nuovo Collegamento Palermo-Catania/ Direzione pianificazione strategica-market analysis".

RFI. "Opentrack: Simulation of railway network".

RFI. "Studio di fatibilita del raddopio della tratta Fiumetorto-Raddusa agira della nuova linea Palermo- Catania". Roma.

RFI. "Tabelle e figure fuori testo (nuovo collegamento Palermo-Catania)". RFI.

RFI. (1947). "Regolamento sui segnali".

RFI. (1962). "Regolamento per la circolazione dei treni".

RFI. (2003). "Fascicolo linea 153".

RFI. (2003). "Fascicolo linea 155".

RFI. (2003). "Fascicolo linea 157".

RFI. (2017). "Enhancement and redevelopment of the railway Messina-Catania- Palermo Itinerary".

RFI. (edizione 1963 ristampa 2007). "Prefazione generale all'orario di servizio". http://site.rfi.it/.

Rotoli, F. e. (2015). "Methodological Review for Capacity and Punctuality Assessment Procedures." . Proceedings of the International Congress on Advanced Railway Engineering. Instanbul, Turkey.

Saaty, T. L. (1980). "The analytic hierarchy process McGraw-Hill." . New York 324.

Sameni, M. K. (2011). "Developing the UIC 406 method for capacity analysis." . 4th International Seminar on Railway Operations Research.

Stefano Ricci, G. M. (2016). "Handouts of the Master of Science in Railway Engineering". Rome: Sapienza University.

UIC, I. U. (2004). "UIC 406(R): Capacity". Paris, France: International Union of Railways (UIC).

Valentinovič, L. a. (2014). "Railway line capacity methods analysis and their application in “Lithuanian Railways” justification." . The 9th International Conference “Environmental Engineering”. Vilnius, Lithuania.

Zanzarin, F. (2017-2018). “Malpensa Airport North Railway Link:impact of expected traffic onto the existing network.”Master thesis. Rome: Sapienza University.

134

135