Caltrain EMU DMU Comparison

3,463 views
2,998 views

Published on

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,463
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
887
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
35
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Caltrain EMU DMU Comparison

  1. 1. CaltrainFuture Technology Assessment Prepared for: Palo Alto Rail Committee Prepared by: JPB May 26, 2011
  2. 2. Committee Requested Topics• Electrification Project (4/13/11)• Electrification 35% Design (4/28/11)• EMU vs. DMU (5/26/11)• HSR and Caltrain MOU (TBD)
  3. 3. EMU vs. DMUEMU DMU
  4. 4. Locomotive Hauled Consist (LHC)• Typically one powered vehicle per train• Heavy – acceleration proportional to train length
  5. 5. Electric Multiple Unit -- EMU • Self propelled electric vehicles • Distributed traction • Light weight – good acceleration
  6. 6. Diesel Multiple Unit -- DMU • Self propelled diesel-mechanical or diesel-electric vehicles • Distributed traction • Medium weight – medium acceleration
  7. 7. Current EMU Market SEPTA Silverliner V Metra Highliner Alstom Coradia Siemens Desiro Stadler KISS
  8. 8. Current DMU Market Nippon Sharyo DMU (SMART) US Railcar (Portland WES)Stadler GTW (Austin Cap Metro) Siemens Desiro (San Diego) US Railcar Double Deck (SFRTA Miami)
  9. 9. How Local Needs Drive Vehicle Selection (Recent Projects) Number   System  Station  Train  Train  Car  Boardings  Headway  Trains  Vehicle  Railroad of    Length  Spacing  Length  Length  Miles  per Day (min) per day Selected Stations (miles) (miles) (cars) (seats) per DayCaltrain* 23 47.3 2.1 71,000  6 600 10 114 32,353  EMUDenver RTD ‐ East 7 23.2 3.3 2,590  4 360 15 149 13,827  EMUDenver RTD ‐ Gold 8 11.4 1.4 1,350  2 180 15 145 3,306  EMUSMART (full buildout) 14 70.2 5.0 6,550  2 158 30 30 4,212  DMUeBART 3 10 3.3 3,900  2 100 15 200 4,000  DMU*Future (2035) 6 TPH ‐ San Jose to San Francisco (assume Gilroy service continues as locomotive hauled)
  10. 10. Caltrain-Specific Constraints• Budget• Right of Way• ADA Accessibility• Tunnel Clearance• Platform Length• Downtown Extension (Transbay) – Tunnel height – Exhaust fans
  11. 11. Uncertainties – 30-year DecisionsEnergy Pricing • Diesel • ElectricityChanging Federal Regulations • ADA • EPAEconomy • Funding • RidershipTechnology Advancements
  12. 12. EMU vs SL-DMU vs DD-DMU Assumptions • 2035 EIR Operation – 114 trains per day • Try to maintain similar operating schedule – maximize station stops and minimize trip time • San Jose to San Francisco (Gilroy shuttle independent of EMU/DMU) • New EMUs or DMUs, Locomotives and coaches retired or moved to Gilroy • Fuel = $4.0 per gallon • Electricity = $.09 per kWh SL-DMU = single level DMU; DD-DMU = double deck DMU
  13. 13. Performance Comparison Single Level  Double Deck Performance Item Bi‐Level EMU DMU DMUTrain Length (number of cars) 6 8 4Seating Capacity (passengers per car) 100 78 180Powered Cars per Train Half All All*Estimated One Way Energy Use 1,723 kWh 122 gal 73 galAcceleration Highest Middle Lowest*Even with all cars powered, the number of station stops must be reduced to maintain common trip time
  14. 14. Infrastructure Comparison Bi‐Level  Single Level  Double Deck Infrastructure Issue Existing EMU DMU DMUTrain Length (number of cars) 5 6 8 4Platform Length (feet) 519* 500 680 350Platform Height for Level Boarding (inches) 8** 25 25 or 48 48Car Height (nominal clearance) 16‐2" 15‐1" 14‐7" 19‐8"Will it fit in existing tunnels? Yes Yes Yes NoWill it fit in current design for DTX tunnel? Yes Yes Yes NoAdditional ventilation required? Yes No Yes YesOverhead Traction Electrification Required? No Yes No NoRed text indicates infrastructure modifications needed*Shortest platform, others are longer**Existing 8" platforms do not accommodate level boarding
  15. 15. Lifecycle Cost Comparison Single Level  Double Deck Cost Item Bi‐Level EMU DMU DMU*Fleet Size 160 214 106Fleet Cost $$$ $$$ $$$Electrification Capital Cost ($785 mil) $$$$ ‐ ‐Extend Platform Length (feet) ‐ $$ ‐Raise Platforms $ $ $$Bore Existing Tunnels ‐ ‐ $$Increased Bore in DTX ‐ ‐ $$Ventilation of DTX for Diesel ‐ $$ $$Maintenance and Storage Facilities $$ $$ $Energy and Vehicle Maintenance (30 yrs) $$$$ $$$$$ $$$$Lifecycle Cost over 30 Years $$$$$ $$$$$ $$$$$$ > $20 mil$$ $20 mil - 100 mil $$$$ > $500 mil -$1 bil$$$ $100 mil - $500 mil $$$$$ < $1 bil
  16. 16. Recommended Technology: EMU• Proven technology and large supplier pool = low risk• Frequent service (6 TPH or more during peak)• Highest acceleration allows service to maximum number of stations• Manageable fleet size• Fits current platform lengths• Lowest local emissions (noise and air quality)
  17. 17. Emerging Technology
  18. 18. Emerging Technologies - Hybrids Fuel Cell Switch EngineHybrid Freight Locomotive Hybrid Metro Vehicle Hybrid Streetcar
  19. 19. Questions/ Answers

×