Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Double-deck EMU with a specific bogie arrangement

1,728 views

Published on

Presentation for 44. Schienenfahrzeugetagung in Graz.

  • Be the first to comment

Double-deck EMU with a specific bogie arrangement

  1. 1. Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer
  2. 2. Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer About me 1990 born 2009 – 2014 CTU in Prague, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering 2013 – … Project Double-deck articulated train (D-DART) 2014 Diploma work feasibility study (D-DART) 2014 – … Designer, Škoda Transportation a.s. 2015 – … Independent technical consultant Interests: Rolling stock design – bogies Suburban transport solutions – railway Motto: Be a part of creating the state-of-the-art.
  3. 3. 6 x 26,4 = 158 m Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer Motivation – Prague suburban railway 0 10 20 30 40 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 Numberofpassengerperdayx103 year S1 S2 S4 S7 S9 •Prague suburban lines have a limited capacity • 3 tracks on S1 only, other 2-track lines • TEN-T lines with IC and freight operation • 3 kV DC system with limited power • Minimum achievable headway is 15(10) minutes • Number of passengers grows significantly • Todays EMUs can‘t offer the required capacity • Platform length is limited to 200 m • Train length can't exceed platform length • What are the requirements for new EMUs? 8 x 26,4 = 211 m Line S1 22 717 Line S7 20 630 Main station Line S4 16 373 120 827 passenger daily 101 761 on 5 main lines Line S9 25 832 Brno Vienna Bratislava Budapest Ostrava Warsaw Hradec Králové Line S2 16 209 České Budějovice Linz Plzeň München/Nürnberg Ústí nad Labem Dresden/Berlin 200 m 2 x 310 seats Source: ROPID
  4. 4. Mass transit EMU requirements Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 4 1) Customer need 2) Better economy e.g S-Bahn Zürich (300 m platforms) Prague suburban (200 m platforms) … Significant parameter in life-cycle costs (LCC)
  5. 5. Why is the weight so important? Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 5 slightly dependent on train weight (traction and braking equipment, about 4%) strongly dependent on train weight, according to local infrastructure manager (about 50%) slightly dependent on train weight (traction and braking requirements, about 2%) strongly dependent on train weight (about 35%) Train path costs 25% Invest 25% Energy 25% Maintenance 25% LCC distribution
  6. 6. Single-deck EMUs – “specific capacity” ( ) Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 6 The conventional (older) approach • There is no more space to increase capacity at the same length. • Reduction of number of bogies can be achieved only with higher axle-load • 19 m bogie pitch is maximum because of loading gauge (width ≥ 2.8m) and axle-load C) Jakobs bogie concept – 19 m length of intermediate section Length 103 m, specific capacity 89% (74% with 8 doors), width 2.82 m, 6 bogies The most recent approach A) Separate cars – 26,4 m length of intermediate section length 106m, specific capacity 90% (75% with 8 doors), width 2.82 m, 8 bogies B) Jakobs bogie concept – 16,4 m length of intermediate section Length 106m, specific capacity 89% (74% with 8 doors), width 2.88 m, 7 bogies total outside length 103 m 106 m 106 m
  7. 7. Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 7 The conventional (older) approach • New solutions (E, F) did not bring any extra useful space - specific capacity • Each bogie devaluates the double-deck effect D) Separate DD cars – 26,4 m length of intermediate section length 106m, specific capacity 118% (103% with 8 doors), width 2.82 m, 8 bogies F) Separate SD and DD cars – 26,4 m length of intermediate section Length 106 m, specific capacity 109% (94% with 8 doors), width 2.82 m, 8 bogies The most recent approach E) Jakobs bogie concept – various lengths of intermediate section Length 95m, specific capacity 111% (94% with 8 doors), width ca. 3 m, 8 bogies Double-deck EMUs – “specific capacity” ( )total outside length 106 m 106 m 95 m
  8. 8. How to achieve greater “specific capacity” ? Greater proportion of double-deck sections To reduce number of bogies through common bogies Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 8 Common bogies with greater load capacity Longer sections than standard bogie pitch Has anybody tried to solve this problem before?
  9. 9. Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 9 Common bogies with greater load capacity Longer sections than standard bogie pitch Design from 1950‘s (partly 1930‘s) More than 180 units built Why don‘t we use it anymore? •High track forces caused by outdated bogie design with nearly rigid axle guidance Why don‘t we use it anymore? • Low reliability resulting from high number of innovative elements used throughout the whole train The main principle was not the reason to abandon these concepts! Design from 1960‘s 3 APT-P units 8 years in test service
  10. 10. Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 10 3-axle bogie of DBz/DBv DR from Görlitz (1950‘s) 2- axle common bogie of the APT-P train (1960‘s) The FEBA “bogie“ of NSB Class 72 EMU (1990‘s) The new 3-axle common bogie
  11. 11. The three-axle common bogie design Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 11 Outpulled pivot (socket) Fully suspended traction motor Dampers Radial steering system (passive) Axle-guide bearing Primary suspension spring Coupling push-pull rod Deformation element Bogie frame Air suspension systems Anti-roll bars
  12. 12. The use of the three-axle common bogie Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 12
  13. 13. 540 kg 547 kg 491 kg 469 kg 572 kg 446 kg 385 kg 3,3/m 3,0/m 3,3/m 4,2/m 4,0/m 4,2/m 5,1/m 2 3 4 5 6 200 300 400 500 600 Seats per meter Mass per seat in kg Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 13 A) Separate cars – 26,4 m length of intermediate section C) Jakobs bogie concept – 19 m length of intermediate section B) Jakobs bogie concept – 16,4 m length of intermediate section D) Separate DD cars – 26,4 m length of intermediate section F) Separate SD and DD cars – 26,4 m length of intermediate section E) Jakobs bogie concept – various length of intermediate section G) D-DART concept 100mlength For comparability are all trainsets calculated without multi-purpose areas or toilets and have 8 double-leaf doors
  14. 14. Basic layout of 4-car trainset Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 14 2 x
  15. 15. Parameters Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 15 Parameter Value Unit Max. operational speed 160 160 160 200 200km/h Number of sections 2 3 4 5 6 Length over couplings 50 74 98 122 146m Height above rail level 4 630 mm Width 2 800 mm Mass 100 149 191 233 275t Number of seats (2nd class only, tip-up incl.) 202 329 471 607 746pcs Number of wheelchair places 2 pcs Number of toilets (standard + universal) 1+1 2+1 3+1 4+1 5+1pcs Loading gauge DE2 acc. to EN 15273 Floor height at entrance doors ARL 550 - 760 mm Wheel diameter (new/worn) 920/860 mm Max. axle load 210 kN Number of driven/all wheelsets 2/7 4/10 6/13 8/16 8/19pcs Continous output at wheel 1 300 2 600 3900 5 200 5 200kW Starting tractive effort 100 200 300 320 320kN
  16. 16. Feasibility study • Mass and payload decomposition • Dynamic model compilation • Simulations (EN 14 363): – Quasistatic safety against derailment – Running safety – Running behavior – Suspension (sway) coefficient • Gauge calculation • Applicable on many configurations Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 16
  17. 17. How can the D-DART help Prague? Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 17 6 x 26,4 = 158 m 2 x 98 = 196 m 200 m 0 10 20 30 40 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 Numberofpassengerperdayx103 year S1 S2 S4 S7 S9 Line S1 22 717 Line S7 20 630 Main station Line S4 16 373 120 827 passenger daily 101 761 on 5 main lines Line S9 25 832 Brno Vienna Bratislava Budapest Ostrava Warsaw Hradec Králové Line S2 16 209 České Budějovice Linz Plzeň München/Nürnberg Ústí nad Labem Dresden/Berlin Source: ROPID 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 Cumulativedistributionofcapacitydemand Occurenceofcapacitydemand Number of passengers Capacity demand in rush hours 6:00 - 9:00 when the maximal route capacity is fully exploited 2016 2021 2026 2036 2 x D-DART - 942 seats2 x 471 - 620 seats 471, year 2036: 50% trains with sufficient capacity 2016: Capacity demand on 70% of trains is 450 seats D-DART, year 2036: 85% trains with sufficient capacity
  18. 18. Double-deck trains in London suburban? • Many studies were done, but all with standard double-deck coach with 4-axle arrangement (limited distance between pivots) • In 2015 the Tata Steel Halcrow JV tried to evaluate the CP6 study with double-deck train with a specific axle arrangement Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 18 Single deck EMU Concept with single-axle running gears D-DART UK Classic DD EMU Jacobs bogie DD EMU
  19. 19. The D-DART UK Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 19 Parameter Required value Designed value Unit Max. operational speed 200 200km/h Number of sections 5 (optionally 6) 5 (optionally 6) Max. length of 5-car/ 6-car rake 125 / 146 122,3 / 145,6 m Number of seats (2nd class only, tip-up incl.) > 600 / > 700 660 / 806 pcs Number of wheelchair places 4 4pcs Number of toilets (standard+universal) 2+2 2+2 pcs Max. height above rail level ≤ 4 500 4 500 mm Max. width acc. to loading gauge 2 800 mm Floor height at entrance doors ARL 1 050 - 1 100 1 100 mm Wheel diameter (new/worn) 920/860 920/860 mm Max. axle load 224 213kN Min. operational braking mean deceleration 9%g (0,88) 1,09 m/s2 Min. emergency braking mean deceleration 12%g (1,15) 1,17m/s2 Min. mean acceleration 0 - 200 km/h* 6%g(0,59) 0,77 m/s2 *) all seats occupied, max.power, adhesion µ=0,25
  20. 20. Benefits of the D-DART concept Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer 20  Lower weight:  lower energy consumption  lower train-path costs  Higher capacity  Less wear Standard capacity tiers  Modularity EMUs PUSH-PULLs
  21. 21. Schienenfahrzeugetagung Graz 11.9.2017, Jan Plomer Further questions: jplomer@seznam.cz

×