DOCSLIB.ORG

Rail Profile with AECOM

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rail Profile with AECOM prepared for North Carolina Statewide North Carolina Department of Transportation Multimodal Freight Plan prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Rail Profile with AECOM February 7, 2017 report North Carolina Statewide Multimodal Freight Plan Rail Profile prepared for North Carolina Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 730 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 500 Atlanta, GA 30318 with AECOM 701 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 475 Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 date February 7, 2017 North Carolina Statewide Multimodal Freight Plan Table of Contents 1.0 Overview ............................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Purpose ...................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Methods and Data Overview ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Section Organization.................................................................................................................. 1-2 2.0 Inventory ............................................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Facilities ..................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Railroad System ............................................................................................................ 2-1 Rail Lines ...................................................................................................................... 2-1 At-Grade Roadway/Rail Crossings ............................................................................... 2-4 2.1.2 Major Rail Facilities ....................................................................................................... 2-4 Major Rail Yards ........................................................................................................... 2-6 Intermodal Facilities and Multi-modal Terminals .......................................................... 2-6 Ports/Marine .................................................................................................................. 2-6 2.2 Freight Significant Corridors ...................................................................................................... 2-8 2.2.1 National Multimodal Freight Network ............................................................................ 2-8 2.2.2 Intermodal Corridors ................................................................................................... 2-11 Crescent Corridor........................................................................................................ 2-11 National Gateway Corridor ......................................................................................... 2-12 2.2.3 North Carolina Statewide Rail Plan Freight Corridors ................................................ 2-12 3.0 Network Usage and Performance ..................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Industries Served ....................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Employment .................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1.2 Goods Movement Demand ........................................................................................... 3-4 3.2 Markets Served .......................................................................................................................... 3-6 3.2.1 Market Overview ........................................................................................................... 3-6 3.2.2 Trading Partners ........................................................................................................... 3-6 3.2.3 Rail Traffic Generators ................................................................................................ 3-11 3.3 Level of Service ....................................................................................................................... 3-13 3.4 System Deficiencies ................................................................................................................. 3-18 3.4.1 Bottlenecks ................................................................................................................. 3-18 3.4.2 Constraints .................................................................................................................. 3-19 3.5 Safety ....................................................................................................................................... 3-20 3.5.1 Rail Safety Initiatives in North Carolina ...................................................................... 3-20 National Railroad Safety Oversight............................................................................. 3-20 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. i North Carolina Statewide Multimodal Freight Plan Crossing Safety ........................................................................................................... 3-21 Inspection and Oversight ............................................................................................ 3-23 Public Awareness and Education ............................................................................... 3-23 3.5.2 North Carolina Rail Accident Statistics ....................................................................... 3-23 Train Accidents in North Carolina ............................................................................... 3-24 Other Rail Accidents or Incidents in North Carolina ................................................... 3-26 At-grade Roadway/Rail Crossing Incidents in North Carolina .................................... 3-27 Rail Incidents involving Hazardous Materials in North Carolina ................................. 3-27 4.0 Future Performance/Long-Term Trends .......................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Future Activity/Demand.............................................................................................................. 4-1 4.2 Trends and Implications of Growth ............................................................................................ 4-2 4.2.1 Trends ........................................................................................................................... 4-2 Demographic, Economic, and Land Use Pattern Trends ............................................. 4-2 Freight Trends ............................................................................................................... 4-3 4.2.2 Implications of Growth .................................................................................................. 4-8 Highway Congestion and Freight Rail .......................................................................... 4-8 Passenger Train Delays ............................................................................................. 4-13 5.0 Needs Assessment ............................................................................................................................ 5-1 5.1 Rail Service Needs – Freight ..................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Freight Rail Needs and Opportunities........................................................................................ 5-2 Appendix A. Rail Capacity Analysis ............................................................................................... A-1 A.1 Data Sources ............................................................................................................................. A-2 A.2 Methodology and Results .......................................................................................................... A-6 A.2.1 Prepare 2014 rail traffic Origin-Destination (OD) matrix for assignment using the 2014 Carload Waybill data ............................................................................................ A-7 A.2.2 Forecast 2045 rail flows using national FAF4 database and prepare 2045 rail traffic OD matrix for assignment ................................................................................... A-9 Forecasting Methodology ............................................................................................. A-9 Adjustments to FAF4 based Forecasts....................................................................... A-10 Forecasting Results and Preparation of 2045 OD Matrix ........................................... A-10 A.2.3 Update rail network information in the TRANSCAD Model using available information .................................................................................................................. A-12 A.2.4 Perform 2014 and 2045 rail tonnage assignment using the TRANSCAD Model ....... A-13 A.2.5 Convert rail mainline annual tonnage flows to average daily carload and intermodal train volumes ............................................................................................. A-15 A.2.6 Collect Rail Mainline Passenger Train Service Frequency Information and Assign to Rail Mainline Segments .........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4 Environmental Consequences
    4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES The discussion on environmental consequences summarizes the potential effects on the human, physical, and natural environments that may result from the construction and operation of the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) project. The existing environment within the project study area was described in Chapter 3. The impacts presented here are based on the proposed preliminary engineering designs for the rail and roadway alignments. Impacts are identified for each of the three alternative alignments within each of the 26 sections of the project. As discussed in Section 2.2, the endpoints of the 26 sections are in locations where the alternative alignments are in a common location. Therefore, alternatives can be evaluated section by section, with a preferred alternative selected for each section. These will be joined together to determine the “best-fit” preferred alternative for the entire study corridor. It should be noted that all persons, business, and non-profit organizations displaced as a result of the project would be compensated in a fair and equitable manner in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, and the North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS-133-5 through 133-18). 4.1 Water Resources Potential project impacts to streams, wetlands, and other jurisdictional waters are discussed in the following sections, followed by discussion of potential permits required. Clean Water Act Waters of the US, Clean Water Act Permits, Construction Moratoria, Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act regulations, North Carolina River Basin Buffer Rules, and Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters are addressed.
    [Show full text]
  • Statewide Logistics Plan for North Carolina
    Statewide Logistics Plan for North Carolina An Investigation of the Issues with Recommendations for Action APPENDICES By George F. List, Ph.D, P.E. P.I. and Head, Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering North Carolina State University Robert S. Foyle, P.E. Co-P.I. and Associate Director, ITRE North Carolina State University Henry Canipe Senior Manager TransTech Management, Inc. John Cameron, Ph.D. Managing Partner TransTech Management, Inc. Erik Stromberg Ports and Harbors Practice Leader Hatch, Mott, MacDonald LLC For the North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management May 13, 2008 Appendices Appendix A: Powerpoint Slide Sets Presentations include: Tompkins Associates North Carolina Statewide Logistics Proposal North Carolina Statewide Logistics Plan Cambridge Systematics Freight Demand and Logistics – Trends and Issues Highway Freight Transportation – Trends and Issues Rail Freight Transportation – Trends and Issues Waterborne Freight Transportation – Trends and Issues State DOTs and Freight – Trends and Issues Virginia Statewide Multimodal Freight Study - Phase I Overview Global Insight Shifts in Global Trade Patterns – Meaning for North Carolina 5/5/2008 North Carolina Statewide Logistics Proposal Presented to: North Carolina State University Project Team Charlotte, NC March 13, 2008 Caveat… This presentation and discussion is from the Shipper’s perspective… ASSO C I ATES CONFIDENTIAL — Use or disclosure of this information is restricted. 2 1 5/5/2008 North American Port Report (1/08) A majority of the Supply Chain Consortium respondents to the North American Port Report survey believe that their supply chain network is not optimal with respect to the ports used for their ocean freight. Significant opportunities exist from getting all aspects of the supply chain aligned to optimizing costs and customer service.
    [Show full text]
  • the Swindon and Cricklade Railway
    The Swindon and Cricklade Railway Construction of the Permanent Way Document No: S&CR S PW001 Issue 2 Format: Microsoft Office 2010 August 2016 SCR S PW001 Issue 2 Copy 001 Page 1 of 33 Registered charity No: 1067447 Registered in England: Company No. 3479479 Registered office: Blunsdon Station Registered Office: 29, Bath Road, Swindon SN1 4AS 1 Document Status Record Status Date Issue Prepared by Reviewed by Document owner Issue 17 June 2010 1 D.J.Randall D.Herbert Joint PW Manager Issue 01 Aug 2016 2 D.J.Randall D.Herbert / D Grigsby / S Hudson PW Manager 2 Document Distribution List Position Organisation Copy Issued To: Copy No. (yes/no) P-Way Manager S&CR Yes 1 Deputy PW Manager S&CR Yes 2 Chairman S&CR (Trust) Yes 3 H&S Manager S&CR Yes 4 Office Files S&CR Yes 5 3 Change History Version Change Details 1 to 2 Updates throughout since last release SCR S PW001 Issue 2 Copy 001 Page 2 of 33 Registered charity No: 1067447 Registered in England: Company No. 3479479 Registered office: Blunsdon Station Registered Office: 29, Bath Road, Swindon SN1 4AS Table of Contents 1 Document Status Record ....................................................................................................................................... 2 2 Document Distribution List ................................................................................................................................... 2 3 Change History .....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • WMATA's Automated Track Analysis Technology & Data Leveraging For
    WMATA’S Automated Track Analysis Technology & Data Leveraging for Maintenance Decisions 1 WMATA System • 6 Lines: 5 radial and 1 spur • 234 mainline track miles and 91 stations • Crew of 54 Track Inspectors and 8 Supervisors walk and inspect each line twice a week. • WMATA’s TGV and 7000 Series revenue vehicles, provide different approaches to automatic track inspection abilities. 2 Track Geometry Vehicle (TGV) • Provides services previously contracted out. • Equipped with high resolution cameras inspecting ROW and tunnels, infrared camera monitoring surrounding temperatures, and ultrasonic inspection system. • Measures track geometry parameters, and produces reports where track parameters do not meet WMATA’s maintenance and safety standards. 3 TGV Measured Parameters . Track gage, rail profile, cross level, alignment, twists, and warps. Platform height and gap, . 3rd rail: height, gage, missing cover board, and temperature. • Inspects track circuits transmitting speed commands and signals for train occupancy detection with different carrier frequencies and code rates. 4 TGV Technology • Parameters such as rail profile, gage distances, 3rd rail and platform gap distances are measured via laser beam shot across running rails, and platforms. • High-speed/high-resolution cameras take high resolution images of the surface where lasers makes contact with the rail. 5 TGV Technology • Track profile is measured via vertical accelerometers, and an algorithm converting acceleration into displacement. • Track alignment is measured with a lateral accelerometer in combination with image analysis. • Warps, twists, and cross levels are measured via gyros and inclinometers, along with distance measurements. 6 Kawasaki 7000 Series Cars • Cars are assembled into 4-Pack sets for operation. • 7K cars are equipped with a system of accelerometers that are mounted on 15% of the B cars.
    [Show full text]
  • NATIONAL RIDESHARING DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM: August 1985 COMPARATIVE EVALUATION REPORT 6
    . UMT A-M A-06-0049-85-1 I R.5 . A3 7 no DOT- TSC- UMTA- National Ridesharing 85— 1 7 u.b.uepartment of Transportation Demonstration Program: Urban Mass Transportation Administration Comparative Evaluation Report UMTA Technical Assistance Program NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. NOTICE The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. , o HE S.ST I 7 ijj nO» p oT- T5C- Technical Report Documontation Pago 7 t. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient' * Catalog No. UMTA-MA- 06-0049-8 5-1 4y Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date NATIONAL RIDESHARING DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM: August 1985 COMPARATIVE EVALUATION REPORT 6. Performing Orgonizotion Code DTS-64 8. Performing Organization Report No. 7. Author^ s) DOT-TSC-UMTA-85- Rosemary, Booth, and Robert Waksman DEPARTMENT OF 1 17 r> - ! v h I r\ : y l n | T /n 9, Performing Orgonizotion Nome and Address TO. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) U.S. Department of Transportation UM527/R5631 25 1985 NOV 1. Research and Special Programs Administr ation' Contract or Grant No. Transportation Systems Center Cambridqe, MA 02142 LIBRARY Type of Report and Period Covered 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address U.S. Department of Transportati on Final Report January 1979-December 1981 Urban Mass Transportation Admini strati n Office of Technical Assistance Id.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation of Glued Insulated Rail Joints with Special Fiber-Glass Reinforced Synthetic Fishplates Using in Continuously Welded Tracks
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Repository of the Academy's Library POLLACK PERIODICA An International Journal for Engineering and Information Sciences DOI: 10.1556/606.2018.13.2.8 Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 77–86 (2018) www.akademiai.com INVESTIGATION OF GLUED INSULATED RAIL JOINTS WITH SPECIAL FIBER-GLASS REINFORCED SYNTHETIC FISHPLATES USING IN CONTINUOUSLY WELDED TRACKS 1 Attila NÉMETH, 2 Szabolcs FISCHER 1,2 Department of Transport Infrastructure, Széchenyi István University Győr, Egyetem tér 1 H-9026 Győr, Hungary, email: [email protected], [email protected] Received 29 December 2017; accepted 9 March 2018 Abstract: In this paper the authors partially summarize the results of a research on glued insulated rail joints with fiber-glass reinforced plastic fishplates (brand: Apatech) related to own executed laboratory tests. The goal of the research is to investigate the application of this new type of glued insulated rail joint where the fishplates are manufactured at high pressure, regulated temperature, glass-fiber reinforced polymer composite plastic material. The usage of this kind of glued insulated rail joints is able to eliminate the electric fishplate circuit and early fatigue deflection and it can ensure the isolation of rails’ ends from each other by aspect of electric conductivity. Keywords: Glued insulated rail joint, Fiber-glass reinforced fishplate, Polymer composite plastic material, Laboratory test 1. Introduction The role of the rail connections (rail joints) is to ensure the continuity of rails without vertical and horizontal ‘step’, as well as directional break. The opportunities to connect rails are the fishplate joints, welding, and dilatation structure (rail expansion device) [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Determination of Tramway Wheel and Rail Profiles to Minimise Derailment
    Rail Te~h~~l~~~ l~l~~t at Manchester Metropolitan University Determination of Tramway Wheel and Rail Profiles to Minimise Derailment Date: 12th February 2008 RTU Ref: 90/3/A Client: ORR Authors: Dr Paul Allen Dr Adam Bevan Senior Research Engineer Senior Research Engineer Tel: 0161 247 6251 Tel: 0161 247 6514 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] ,; oFFacE o~ aa~~ a~cu~arioN Determination of Tramway Wheel and Rail Profiles to Minimise Derailment Final Report Project Title Determination of Tramway Wheel and Rail Profiles to Minimise Derailment(ORR/CT /338/DTR) Project Manager Dr. Paul Allen Client ORR Date 12/02/2008 Project Duration 6 Months Issue 1 Distribution Dudley Hoddinott (ORR) David Keay (ORR) PDA/AB/SDI/JMS (RTU) Project file Report No. 90/3/A Reviewed bv: Prof. Simon Iwnicki Contact: Dr Paul Allen Senior Research Engineer Tel: 0161 247 6251 E-mail: [email protected] si !Yw. 2n'.-^y..yy.:m'~ ~ 4'~:~~ .!fit'•.. ~' .y,.l.: CONFIDENTIAL Determination of Tramway Wheel and Rail Profiles to Minimise Derailment Final Report Summary As the first phase of a three stage project, the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) commissioned a wide ranging study to review current tramway systems and their wheel and rail profiles within the UK. Completed by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Labs, the work was reported under the Phase 1 ORR study document, entitled `A survey of UK tram and light railway systems relating to the wheel/rail interface' ~'~. Phase 2 of the work, presented within this report, analyses this initial study and extends the work through the application of wheel-rail contact analysis techniques and railway vehicle dynamics modelling to determine optimised wheel and rail profile combinations which minimise derailment risk and wear.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael L. West, PGA Independence Golf Club, Midlothian, Virginia Mike
    Michael L. West, PGA Independence Golf Club, Midlothian, Virginia Mike was born June 24, 1960 in Burlington, North Carolina to Jack and Elsie West. He has one brother, David. Both of Mike’s parents and both of his grandfathers played golf. His father introduced him to the game at Shamrock Golf Club in Burlington when Mike was three years old. Mike later played at Piedmont Crescent, now Quarry Hills Country Club, in Graham, North Carolina. Mike’s father, Jack, along with Shamrock Golf Club’s Head PGA Professional Steve Walker, had a tremendous influence on Mike’s game at an early age. Father and son played numerous rounds together with Mike’s fondest memory being that of going to Pinehurst to play course #2 on Saturday mornings. Steve Walker had played collegiate golf at Wake Forest in the late 1960s and became like a big brother and mentor who introduced Mike to Wake Forest players such as Lanny Wadkins, Joe Inman, Jim Simmons, and Jack Lewis. Mike worked in the golf shop and on the outside at Piedmont Crescent while in high school. He picked the range in exchange for hitting practice balls. Mike graduated from the University of North Carolina (Chapel Hill) with a degree in Business Administration. He played collegiate golf from 1978-1982, and won the 1980 Eastern Amateur, the 1982 North Carolina Amateur, and the 1982 Carolinas Amateur. Mike declared his professional status in 1983 and played in many PGA Tour and mini- tour events until 1988. He worked from 1989 to 1992 at Farmington Country Club in Charlottesville, Virginia for PGA Professional Bobby McIver and was elected to PGA membership while there in October of 1990.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Track
    CALTRAIN DESIGN CRITERIA CHAPTER 2 - TRACK CHAPTER 2 TRACK A. GENERAL This Chapter includes criteria and standards for the planning, design, construction, and maintenance as well as materials of Caltrain trackwork. The term track or trackwork includes special trackwork and its interface with other components of the rail system. The trackwork is generally defined as from the subgrade (or roadbed or trackbed) to the top of rail, and is commonly referred to in this document as track structure. This Chapter is organized in several main sections, namely track structure and their materials including civil engineering, track geometry design, and special trackwork. Performance charts of Caltrain rolling stock are also included at the end of this Chapter. The primary considerations of track design are safety, economy, ease of maintenance, ride comfort, and constructability. Factors that affect the track system such as safety, ride comfort, design speed, noise and vibration, and other factors, such as constructability, maintainability, reliability and track component standardization which have major impacts to capital and maintenance costs, must be recognized and implemented in the early phase of planning and design. It shall be the objective and responsibility of the designer to design a functional track system that meets Caltrain’s current and future needs with a high degree of reliability, minimal maintenance requirements, and construction of which with minimal impact to normal revenue operations. Because of the complexity of the track system and its close integration with signaling system, it is essential that the design and construction of trackwork, signal, and other corridor wide improvements be integrated and analyzed as a system approach so that the interaction of these elements are identified and accommodated.
    [Show full text]
  • 2040 Statewide Transportation Plan Challenges & Opportunities
    CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES SEPTEMBER 2011 Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................................................................... iii Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... ES‐i 1 Purpose of Report ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Planning Framework .............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Study Goals ............................................................................................................................. 3 1.3 Report Organization ............................................................................................................... 4 2 North Carolina Transformation Reform Process (Policy to Projects) .................................................. 5 2.1 North Carolina Multimodal Investment Network .................................................................. 5 2.2 Level of Service and Investment Categories .......................................................................... 6 2.3 Organizational Performance Dashboard ................................................................................ 7 3 North Carolina Transportation System: A Snapshot ........................................................................... 9 3.1 Highways ...............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Round up of Recent Activities in Our Sections
    Section Activities A round up of recent activities in our Sections AS PUBLISHED IN The Journal April 2018 Volume 136 Part 2 Sections BIRMINGHAM CROYDON & BRIGHTON DARLINGTON & NORTH EAST EDINBURGH Our online events calendar holds all GLASGOW of our Section meetings. IRISH LANCASTER, BARROW & CARLISLE You’ll also find full contact details on LONDON our website. MANCHESTER & LIVERPOOL MILTON KEYNES NORTH WALES NOTTINGHAM & DERBY SOUTH & WEST WALES THAMES VALLEY WESSEX WEST OF ENGLAND WEST YORKSHIRE YORK SECTION ACTIVITIES lighting Towers that sprang up on the railway organisation. On one occasion, John was landscape during the modernisation days of called into to record Pickfords moving the A round up the 1960s and 70s. Dickens Inn from one end of St. Catherine’s Dock in London to the other. Photographers were based at the regional of recent offices and in the various railway workshops A less glamorous assignment, but nonetheless which were around at that time. John was fascinating (and unnerving) was recording called in to take pictures of work in progress on the water jets spraying out of the brickwork in activities in new trains and then at their launch. Abbotscliffe Tunnel. This required elaborate lighting to ensure a clear shot could be On some occasions, it was just a case of recorded. Works for the opening of the our Sections. being in the right place at the right time. On Channel Tunnel including over bridge deck his way to another job in Gloucester he was raising and tunnel floor lowering provided a lot able to get in position on a signal gantry at of work in the early 1990s.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 December 2020
    Derailment investigation Dr Mark Burstow, Network Rail Technical Fellow Principal Vehicle Track Dynamics Engineer Providing technical leadership Overview • History- when and how did derailment investigation really develop? • Causes of derailment and contributory factors • The investigation process o Evidence collection o Analysis Derailment Investigation December 2020 Page 2 How derailment investigation became a science The 1960s became the era of the freight train derailment • Particularly, short wheelbase 4-wheeled wagons on plain track • A worrying trend o 11/2/1961: Between Rugby & Lutterworth o 1/4/1963: Weedon o 21/1/1966: Steventon o 31/7/1967: Thirsk 450 400 Passenger 350 Freight 300 250 200 Derailments Derailments 150 100 50 0 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 Year Derailment Investigation December 2020 Page 3 Vehicle dynamics research Newly formed BR Research department took on challenge of finding cause for these derailments • Developed theoretical and mathematical basis for wheelset dynamic instability (‘hunting’) • Identified that some freight vehicles were becoming unstable at speeds as low as 20mph, depending on condition of suspension and wheel wear Understanding of vehicle dynamics provided better explanation of the causes of derailment • Separate group within BR Research formed to undertake investigations • Became part of AEA Technology Rail following privatisation, then DeltaRail Derailment Investigation December 2020 Page 4 So, where do we come in? Following the Hatfield accident in October 2000 • Railtrack created
    [Show full text]