Download as PDF, PPTX
Uploaded byAdina Levin
Caltrain EMU DMU Comparison
The document provides information about electrifying Caltrain service between San Jose and San Francisco. It compares the options of electric multiple units (EMUs), single-level diesel multiple units (SL-DMUs), and double-deck diesel multiple units (DD-DMUs). EMUs would require electrification but provide the best performance. SL-DMUs and DD-DMUs would not require electrification but have higher lifetime costs and less acceleration ability. Taking into account factors like infrastructure requirements, costs, service levels and environmental impacts, EMUs are recommended as the best technology for Caltrain's needs.
More Related Content
Similar to Caltrain EMU DMU Comparison
Caltrain EMU DMU Comparison
- 1. Caltrain Future Technology Assessment Prepared for: Palo Alto Rail Committee Prepared by: JPB May 26, 2011
- 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. EMU vs. DMU EMU DMU
- 4. Locomotive Hauled Consist(LHC) • Typically one powered vehicle per train • Heavy – acceleration proportional to train length
- 5. Electric Multiple Unit-- EMU • Self propelled electric vehicles • Distributed traction • Light weight – good acceleration
- 6. Diesel Multiple Unit-- DMU • Self propelled diesel-mechanical or diesel-electric vehicles • Distributed traction • Medium weight – medium acceleration
- 7. Current EMU Market SEPTA Silverliner V Metra Highliner Alstom Coradia Siemens Desiro Stadler KISS
- 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. How Local NeedsDrive 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 Day Caltrain* 23 47.3 2.1 71,000 6 600 10 114 32,353 EMU Denver RTD ‐ East 7 23.2 3.3 2,590 4 360 15 149 13,827 EMU Denver RTD ‐ Gold 8 11.4 1.4 1,350 2 180 15 145 3,306 EMU SMART (full buildout) 14 70.2 5.0 6,550 2 158 30 30 4,212 DMU eBART 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. Caltrain-Specific Constraints • Budget • Right of Way • ADA Accessibility • Tunnel Clearance • Platform Length • Downtown Extension (Transbay) – Tunnel height – Exhaust fans
- 11. Uncertainties – 30-yearDecisions Energy Pricing • Diesel • Electricity Changing Federal Regulations • ADA • EPA Economy • Funding • Ridership Technology Advancements
- 12. EMU vs SL-DMUvs 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. Performance Comparison Single Level Double Deck Performance Item Bi‐Level EMU DMU DMU Train Length (number of cars) 6 8 4 Seating Capacity (passengers per car) 100 78 180 Powered Cars per Train Half All All* Estimated One Way Energy Use 1,723 kWh 122 gal 73 gal Acceleration Highest Middle Lowest *Even with all cars powered, the number of station stops must be reduced to maintain common trip time
- 14. Infrastructure Comparison Bi‐Level Single Level Double Deck Infrastructure Issue Existing EMU DMU DMU Train Length (number of cars) 5 6 8 4 Platform Length (feet) 519* 500 680 350 Platform Height for Level Boarding (inches) 8** 25 25 or 48 48 Car Height (nominal clearance) 16'‐2" 15'‐1" 14'‐7" 19'‐8" Will it fit in existing tunnels? Yes Yes Yes No Will it fit in current design for DTX tunnel? Yes Yes Yes No Additional ventilation required? Yes No Yes Yes Overhead Traction Electrification Required? No Yes No No Red text indicates infrastructure modifications needed *Shortest platform, others are longer **Existing 8" platforms do not accommodate level boarding
- 15. Lifecycle Cost Comparison Single Level Double Deck Cost Item Bi‐Level EMU DMU DMU* Fleet Size 160 214 106 Fleet 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. 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.
- 18. Emerging Technologies -Hybrids Fuel Cell Switch Engine Hybrid Freight Locomotive Hybrid Metro Vehicle Hybrid Streetcar
- 19.