Light Rail Day Stockholm · PDF fileLight Rail Day Stockholm 2012 ... Israel, Qatar, Mexico, Luxemburg, Namibia, Netherlands, ... Public Utility Company Public Housing

OSK Consult Beratung und Planung für Verkehr und Industrie

Light Rail Day Stockholm 2012 13.November 2012, "Elite Hotel Marina Tower“

Olaf Scholtz-Knobloch

Organizational Stepping Stones from

Bus to Light Rail Service

OSK Consult Beratung und Planung für Verkehr und Industrie sheet 2

Content

1. Introduction

2. What is Light Rail?

3. Differences between Bus and LRT Systems

4. Capacity Development

5. Performance Development

6. Project Cycle

7. Alternative Project Cycle

8. Traditional City Government Organization

9. City Government with Private Participation

10. Governmental Control Organization

Tec.

Org.


Associated / Partner

Olaf Scholtz-Knobloch Dipl.-Ing. (TU), Dipl.-Ing. (FH), EURAIL-ING

TCP Director Engineering

Senior Public Transport Expert

Railway Engineer

Appraiser

Introduction of myself


Introduction of myself

• optimization of the wheel / track interface

• detection of basic design errors concerning

the tracks and rolling stock

• assistance with the preparation of the

specification for infrastructure

• and rolling stock

• selection of parameters and definition

of suitable requirements

• minimization of noise, vibrations and wear

• assistance with planning and aligning

• Electrical system design including contact lines,

power supply, SCADA, telecommunication, signaling

• minimization of stray currents and optimization

of the electromagnetic compatibility (EMC)

• assistance with the continuous system improvement

• consulting and set-up of infrastructure data management

Independent Expert Consultants / Appraiser:

• railway systems and public transport

• rolling stock

• track work and infrastructure

• operations and maintenance

• depots and workshops

OSK-Consult Olaf Scholtz-Knobloch

Haus 5, Meerbuscher Str. 64-78

40670 Meerbusch / Düsseldorf

+49 (21 59) 69 42 – 16

www.osk-consult.de [email protected]

Foreign Experiences:

Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Finland,

France, Germany, Greece, Iran, Israel, Qatar, Mexico, Luxemburg, Namibia, Netherlands,

Panama, Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic, Rumania, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, USA,

Venezuela

Mayor Activities:

• System Design Studies

• Specification / Tendering

• Maintenance Facilities

• Expert Reviews

• Investigation of Damages

• Rolling Stock and Railway System Acceptances

• System Optimization

LIGHTRAIL TUNING GROUP c/o OSK-Consult

Haus 5, Meerbuscher Str. 64-78

40670 Meerbusch / Düsseldorf

+49 (21 59) 69 42 – 16

www.lightrail-tuning.de [email protected]


Content

1. Introduction





6. Project Cycle






What is Light Rail?

Tramway

TramTrain

Stadtbahn / Light Rail

Heavy Metro

Heavy Suburban Railway

Light Rail

Heavy Rail Light Suburban Railway

Light Metro


Content

1. Introduction





6. Project Cycle






Differences between Bus and LRT

LRT vehicles

LRT right of way ROW

stations

depots & workshops

driving signals

priority system

if necessary, train protection system

OperationControlCenter

buses

streets

stops

depots & workshops

seldom driving signals

seldom priority system

n.n.

OperationControlCenter

Technical system hardware:


LRT Vehicles => • more passengers per vehicle

• more riding comfort

• longer lifetime

• longer units

• longer clearing time at junctions and crossings

Dedicated, segregated or independent ROW => • need of space (one lane from MIT or other solution)

Bus vs. LRT

System Components

Differences between Bus and LRT


Stations instead of Stops => • need of space

• more safe

• more quick

LRT Depots Workshops => • bigger than bus depots

• need of special machinery

LRT Signals => • more complex, higher requirements to safety

Bus vs. LRT


LRT priority system • more complex

• higher requirements to safety

Eventually with train protection system • complex

• very high requirements

Bus vs. LRT


Generally => LRT is • more modern

• more comfortable

• more efficient

• more system performance

more durable

• infrastructure lifetime up to 100 years

• rolling stock lifetime is 30 years and more

Bus vs. LRT


Content

1. Introduction





6. Project Cycle






Analyses of the transport performance of the existing

bus network

• number of passengers (per line, per h, per day etc.)

• selection of bus routes

with more than 500, 1.000

or xxx passengers

per average hour or peak hour

• etc.

Capacity Development


Analyses of the transport performance on possible new

corridors

• not served till

now by any public

transport mode

• Depending on new

city development

(industrial, cultural,

educational, etc.)

Capacity Development


Exploiting of performance of high class system

higher system comfort is

bringing more passengers

Performance Development


Content

1. Introduction





6. Project Cycle







capacity

lenght widh

[m] [m] [pas. / vehic.]

Bus 12 2,5 90

articulated Bus 18 2,5 130

short LRV 25 2,4 / 2,65 180

medium LRV 30 2,4 / 2,65 220

long LRV 40 2,4 / 2,65 290

trains up to 120 2,4 / 2,65 880

stations signals priorisation intervals

widh tipical min (one vehicle) max (one vehicle)

[m] [pas. / h / dir.] [pas. / h / dir.]

normal bus 14 28 1,5 some none 60, 30, 20, 15, 12,10, 5 90 1.080

articulated bus 18 36 2 some partly 60, 30, 20, 15, 12,10, 5 130 1.560

LRT light performance 2 some partly 15; 12; 10; 7,5; 5 720 2.160

LRT medium performance 60 80 3 driving signals yes 12; 10; 7,5; 5 1.100 3.300 6.600 (60 m)

LRT high performance 100 120 4 driv. sig. / partly trainprotec. yes 10; 7,5; 5; 3; 2 1.740 8.700 34.800 (120 m)

Vehicle

Vehicle performancees

30

train

capacity (on basis of showen intervals)

[pas. / h / dir.]

stop

lenght

[m]

System performances

Bus to LRT




Content

1. Introduction





6. Project Cycle






Project Cycle

Public Institutions Private Institutions

universal LRT engineer (ICC) political discussion

conducting prefeasibility study independend expert engineers with

political decision technical and economical background

conducting feasibility study small engineering company with

envirnmental public participation departments for differnet disciplines

advisor financial and legal decision to go, clary. financ.

adviser conducting conceptual planning medium sice engineering company

conducting plan approval procedure with departments for differnet disciplines

pan approval

confirmation of public benefit

organizing Financing

special conducting detailed engineering bigger engineering company diff. departments

experts conducting tendering procedure bigger engineering company diff. departments

conducting construction system vendor / komponent vendors

conducting putting into operation system vendor / komponent vendors

Classic Project Organization

assisted by (minimus requirnments) workes carried out by (minimus requirnments)Main ActorsP

ub

lic In

stitu

ion

s

City, C

ou

nty

, S

tate

, e

tc.

Priva

te In

stitu

ion

s

System Characteristics Definition (Designstandards)


Content

1. Introduction





6. Project Cycle






Alternative Project Cycle

Public Institutions Private Institutions

universal LRT engineer (ICC) political discussion

conducting prefeasibility study independend expert engineers with

political decision technical and economical background

conducting feasibility study small engineering company with

envirnmental public participation departments for differnet disciplines

advisor financial and legal decision to go, clary. financ.

adviser conducting conceptual planning medium sice engineering company with

conducting plan approvalprocedure with departments for diff. disciplines

plan approval

confirmation of public benefit

organizat financing

special conducting tendering procedure medium sice engineering company, diff. dep.

experts conducting detailed engineering system vendor with subcontractors and

conducting construction engineering consultants

conducting putting into operation

workes carried out by (minimus requirnments)P

ub

lic In

stitu

ion

s

City, C

ou

nty

, S

tate

, e

tc.

Priva

te In

stitu

ion

s

Public Private Partnership (PPP, BOT, DBOM, etc.)

assisted by (minimus requirnments) Main Actors

System Characteristics Definition

+ operation


Content

1. Introduction





6. Project Cycle






Traditional City Gov. Organization

City Government

Public Utility

Company

Public Housing

Enterprise

Public Transportation

Company ……..

Operation

Department

Infrastructure

Department Vehicle

Management

Adminis-

tration

Track

Signaling

….

….

….

….

……..

Example 1:

….

Transport

Association


City Government

Public Utility

Company

Public Housing

Enterprise

Public Transportation

Company

…….. Public Utility

Company

Operation

Department

Infrastructure

Department Vehicle

Management

Adminis-

tration

Track

Signaling

….

….

….

….

….

……..

Traditional City Gov. Organization

Example 2:

Transport

Association


Content

1. Introduction





6. Project Cycle






City Gov. with Private Participation

City Government

Public

Utility

Company

Public

Transportation

Authority ……..

Example 3:

Public

Housing

Enterprise

Private PT

Company

Operation

Department

Infrastructure

Department Vehicle

Management

Adminis-

tration

Track

Signaling

….

….

….

….

….

……..

Transport

Association


City Government

PT

Rolling Stock

Mangement

Public

Transportation

Authority ....

PT Operating

Company

PT Maintenance

Company (Infra)

Track

Signaling

….

….

Example 4:

….

Public

Housing

Enterprice

PT

Infrastructure

Management

PT Maintenance

Company (RoSto)

City Gov. with Private Participation

Transport

Association


Content

1. Introduction





6. Project Cycle






Governmental Control Organization

EU

TEIV

TSI

UITP

Railway

Building and

Operation Act

LR

Building and

Operation Act



Ministry of Transport

EBA / Federal

Railway

Office

HR Operating

Company

….

Department of State Technical

Inspectorate

LR Operating

Company

….

AEG / Railway Law

EBO / Railway

Building and

Operation Act

PBEFG / PT Law

BOStrab / Light Rail

Building and

Operation Act

Heavy Rail Light Rail

Example Germany:



Ministry of Transport

Federal

Railway

Office

Operating

Company

….

Railway Law

+ Addendum and exceptions for Light Rail

Railway Building and Operation Act

+ Addendum and exceptions for Light Rail

Railway (light and heavy)

Other Example:

Railway Law

+ PT Law

Railway Building

and Operation

Act

+ LR Act

or


Thank you for your attention!

Documentation, Information?

Please contact:

Olaf Scholtz-Knobloch

[email protected]

[email protected]


Design Standards

1. Rolling Stock

Example: Medium Capacity Light Rail System

Vehicle:

• length 30 m

• width 2,65 m

• weight 40 t

• Seats 80

• Standees 100

• 400 kW

• Vmax 80 km/h

Train:

• max. lenght 60 m

length of Stations

length of vehicle berth’s


Design Standards

2. Right of Way


• mostly segregated

• In special down town areas

not segregated in paving

• only in case of no other

possibility on independent

ROW

• standardized Types

(normal, paved, lawn)


Design Standards

3. Stations


• length 60 m

• 3 standards for 3 capacity categories

• Station width

• Station equipment (roof, shelter, seats etc.)


Design Standards

4. Line infrastructure


• normal track gage

• normal minimum radius 50 m

• extreme minimum radius 25 m

• max gradient 4 %

• power 750 V

• where ever possible simple catenary

• driving signals, no train protection

• widely standardized

Documents

Light Rail Day Stockholm · PDF fileLight Rail Day Stockholm 2012 ... Israel, Qatar, Mexico, Luxemburg, Namibia, Netherlands, ... Public Utility Company Public Housing