SP2 Progress beyond State of the Art on Rail Freight Systems First dissemination workshop 10th of June 2015

Transcription

1 Capacity for Rail SP2 Progress beyond State of the Art on Rail Freight Systems First dissemination workshop 10th of June 2015

2 Participants in WP KTH Bo-Lennart Nelldal 2. KTH Mats Berg 3. KTH Behzad Kordnejad 4. UNEW Dewan Islam 5. DICEA Stefano Ricci 6. NEWOPERA Armand Toubol 7. FFE Ignacio González 8. UIC Laurent Schmitt 9. UU Anders Rydberg 10. DB Burchard Ripke 11. Trafikverket Tomas Arvidsson/Mikael Thunborg 2

3 EU vision In 2011, the White Paper on European Transport reasserted how fundamental transport was for society, for the mobility of European citizens and for the growth and vitality of the European economy. C4R objectives CAPACITY4RAIL will also look towards 2030/2050, by proposing guidelines for future deployments in the mid-term, recommendations for technologies to de developed and deployed in the long term 3

4 1. Introduction 2. Demand for rail and freight flows in Europe towards 2030/ Customer requirements for different goods segments 4. Technical development 5. Traffic and operational development 6. Conclusions and recommendations for an efficient rail freight system 2030/2050 List of abbreviations References 4

5 2. Demand for rail freight 2030/ Demand for rail and freight flows in Europe towards 2030/2050 Rail has lost market share on a growing market. Truck has taken care of most of the increase. The market share for rail varies much between countries. In some countries the share is relative high and growing but in others still decrease. Most forecasts show an increase of the total demand of 50-60% until 2050 but rather constant market share for rail with a business as usual scenario. With mode shift as in EU white paper rail market share will increase and the demand for freight rail will be 4-5 times as today and 2-3 times as business as usual 2050 This is a demanding but not impossible scenario for rail to both increase quality and capacity to achieve the EU target. Our mission is to show the possibilities. 5

6 2. Demand for rail freight 2030/2050 Rail market share differs East West 6

7 2. Demand for rail freight 2030/2050 Rail market share differs West West 7

8 2. Demand for rail freight 2030/2050 The EU target - what does it For freight transportation by ,300 billion tonne-km 53% of transports in EU is >300 km Market share for rail is 25% on distances >300 km mean? rail and truck in EU 2050 total 3,500 billion tonne-km Increase of approx. 50% Market share for rail increases from 25% to 60% on distances >300km Source: Processing of data from Transtools in TOSCA and at KTH 8

9 3. Future customer requirements 3. Future customer requirements The customer requirements are: Satisfy the customers quality requirements: Reliability, transport time, frequency Offer a competitive price The logistic trends are outsourcing, offsho oring and centralization Rail must be more flexible and have a dense network Competitiveness with other modes: Low cost trucks are here Longer, heavier trucks will come Sulphur directive for sea transports Rail must be much more competitivee 9

10 3. Future customer requirements Customer requirements: Environment Quality Cost 10

11 3. Future customer requirements Logistic patterns and requirements Logistics trends are outsourcing, offshoring and centralization Outsourcing is not longer only an advantage for EU countries Backsourcing is a new trend Cost will still be the most important key indicator in the near future Spatial organization means there is a need for rail to have a dense network 11

12 3. Future customer requirements Longer and heavier trucks In some countries: 18m -> 24 m In Sweden: 60 ->74ton 25m->32m Cost for inter modal - direct trucking Cost SEK/TEU Truck 18 m 2 TEU Truck 25 m 3 TEU Truck 32 m 4 TEU 29 Sgns 3 TEU/wagon To compete rail must be even more effective: Longer and heavier trains and wagons Sgrss 4 TEU/wagon 22 VEL 4 TEU/wagon More competitive inter modal Distance km 12

13 3. Technical development 3. Technical development Wagon performance: Higher axle load, higher speed, wider gauge, ligther wagons and more efficient length utilization Wagon technology: Track-friendly running gear, more efficient brakes as LL-brake, disc brake with less noise, electro pneumatic brakes and automatic couplers Locomotives: Higher tractive effort, higher axle load for better adhesion, duolocomotives and hybrid diesels Energy consumption and CO2 emissions: Electric locos more than two times efficient than diesels, Increasing electrified network, possibility to reduce energy use per tonnekm by 40% to 2050 and CO2 even more Intermodal: Important to reduce terminal costs with horizontal transfer for containers and roll on roll of for trailers, compact terminals with intermediate stops 13

14 3. Technical development Wagons: Incremental development or system change? Incremental development: Higher axle load 22,5 25 ton Higher speed km/h Higher gauge End of train device LL-brakes Lighter wagons System change: Higher axle load 22, ton Higher speed km/h Higher and wider gauge Electro pneumatic brakes Disc brakes Automatic couplers 14

15 3. Technical development Locomotives: Do we need higher effort or adhesive weight? Modern electric locos are developed for passenger service that means 5-6 MW, 200 km/h and 21 tons axle load For freight higher axle load is essential to handle heavier trains Longer trains Longer trains are often possible with limited investments in infrastructure Today s standard m but m is used on some lines With one loco: m trains, with two locos: m trains With one loco more economic operation There is a need of unified braking in Europe 15

16 3. Technical development 3. Inter Modal terminal handling is crucial Terminal costs have a high share of the total transport cost Terminals must be built for reach-stackers which lift trailers and containers Big areas must be built for high axle load even if most trailers are not liftable The terminal cannot be electrified diesel engines are needed to shunt the train Tracks has to be built to park the wagons Endpoint traffic on long distances no network The aim must be to develop cheaper an nd more flexible systems 16

17 3. Technical development 3. Inter Modal horizontal transfer of containers linear traffic 17 Containers and swap bodies will be able to reloaded under the catenary The terminal can be localized on a siding for a short stop No need for diesel shunting engine and no need for park the wagons The train and the truck are independent of each other The terminal can be very compact and cheap It is possible to have terminals along the line With more terminals feeder transports will be shorter This means lower logistic costs for customers and society

18 3. Technical development 3. Inter Modal roll on roll off of trailers 18 Most trailers are not equipped to be lifted The market for inter modal of trailers are therefore restricted If the trailers could be rolled off and on all trailers could be handled Then the terminals has to be dimensioned only for the trailers axle load Terminals can be at a siding or along the line The terminal can be very compact and cheap This means lower logistic costs for customers and society

19 5. Traffic and operational development Do we need Wagon Load (WL)? The containers width and height restrict the volume of inter modal The truck performance restrict the weight of containers It is possible to load more in a WL than in a truck or container With Higher axle load and wider gauge the differences will be greater Heavy and voluminous freight can be transported cheaper in WL than in IM WL must be developed rather than abandoned

20 5. Traffic and operational development Possibilities to develop Wagon Load Handle group of wagons instead of single wagons Production in cooperation with trainload Booked network and capacity management Higher axle load, meter load and wider gauge Concentration of marshalling yards and liner feeder trains Automatize of marshalling Automatic couplers

21 5. Traffic and operational development Linear operation and Duo-locos Linear trains can be more effective than hub and spoke systems Sometimes the long distance train also can distribute wagons With duo-locos it also possible to shunt wagons at un-electrified tracks One duo-loco can replace one electric loco and one diesel loco In long term it will also be possible to not electrify yards and sidings

22 5. Traffic and operational development Capacity increase by ERTMS Better signaling system can improve capacity especially on double track By ERTMS level 2 capacity for freight on a double track increase by 5% ERTMS level 2 in combination with shorter block sections with 37% ERTMS level 3 with moving block it can increase by 42% It is important to implement ERTMS level 3 a.s.a.p. The cost for establish ERTMS is relatively high on old lines and locos

23 5. Traffic and operational development Tracking, tracing and monitoring Location through satellites or cellular mobile communication RFID and internet in combination for information from trains in real time On board or way side monitoring for freight Monitoring can also be used for infrastructure health control Intelligent rail is technically possible but not at all fully used in the rail system

24 6. Efficient rail freight 2030/2050 To shift the trend is not only a question of technique - It is also a question of changing behaviour and politics 24

25 6. Demand and rail network 2030/2050 White paper forecast 2050 In tonne-km Source: D-rail Rail Freight Corridors 2015 Established White paper forecast 2050 In tonne Source: D-rail High Speed Network 2025 Existing and planned Source: UIC

26 6. Efficient rail freight 2030/2050 Incremental development or system change? Rail performance has always been improved successive Axle load, speed, train length, train weight has been improved HSR was a system change for passenger traffic HCR High Capacity Rail can be a system change for freight HCR = RFC + longer trains + EP-brake + automatic couple? 26

27 6. Efficient rail freight 2030/2050 Capacity can be improved in many ways Longer and heavier trains Higher axle load and higher speed Better signaling system HSR will free capacity for freight and regional trains on conventional lines Dedicated freight lines is an option when RFC is fully utilized 27

28 Task Efficient freight rail freight 2030/2050 Optimizing wagons, trains and infrastructure - A system approach 20ft ct Trailers 8 ton/m Coils Paper Commodities Length 880 m Wagons Trains rains 6 MW 25 ton 3,6 x 3,6 m Infrastructure Network 1000 m m

29 6. Vision for rail 2030/2050 Results of implementation of the proposals in the EU White Paper Decreased greenhouse gas emissions Greenhouse gas emissions will be approx. 20% lower with mode shift than with a baseline scenario for 2050 Possibility to reduce the greenhouse gases by approx. 30% if low-emitting low production of electricity can be implemented affects both rail and electric cars Increased demand for rail transportation Rail freight transportation will be times greater than today and times greater than in the baseline scenario for 2050 Rail passenger transportation will be times greater than today and times greater than in the baseline scenario for

30 6. Vision for rail 2030/

31 Executive summary Conclusions and recommendations for further investigation to establish a competitive rail system 2030/2050 Today ss trend for freight are not in line with EU target - how to make modal shift in countries with low and decreasing market share for rail? The wagons: Incremental development or system change what is needed and how to implement a system change? Locomotives: Higher axle load is a possibility to handle heavier trains but how will it affect the track? Longer trains is an option with one loco m with two locos 2x = m, what is optimal? ERTMS L2 must be completed with shorter block lengths to gain capacity important to implement ERTMS L3 The future network for HSR may free capacity for freight if slots will be reserved on the conventional network important with high performance on RFC Rail can make a real contribution to mobility and to avoid the climate change if EU target will be implemented and rails potential fully utilized 31

32 Executive summary Equipment Wagons Running gears Brakes Brake control Couples Max Speed Max Axle load Floor height lowest IT-system Locomotives Tractive effort kn Axle load Propulsion Fuel Engineers Trains Train lengths in RFC Train weight 32 Common standard 2010 Incremental change 2030 * System change 2050 * Different Casted-brakes Pneumatic Screw couples 100 km/h 22,5 tonnes 1100 mm Way-side 50% Track-friendly LL-brakes Radio controlled EOT Automatic couplers on some trains 120 km/h 22,5-25 tonnes 1000 mm Some in wagons All track friendly Disc-brakes Fully Electronic Automatic couples on all trains km/h 22,5-30 tonnes 800 mm All radio controlled tonne Electric Diesel Always drivers ,5 tonne Some duo-locos LNG/Diesel Some driverless tonne Most duo-locos LNG/electric All driverless m tonnes m tonnes m tonnes *) Adapted to market needs in each product and line

33 Executive summary Equipment Infrastructure Rail Freight Corridors Signalling systems Standard rail weight Speed ordinary freight Speed fast freight Traffic system SWL Common standard 2010 Incremental change 2030 * System change 2050 * km Different UIC 60 kg/m 100 km/h 100 km/h km ERTMS L2 in RFC 72 kg/m km/h km/h km ERTMS L3 in RFC 72 kg/m 120 km/h km/h Marshalling - feeder Marshalling feeder Some liner trains Remote controlled Endpoint-trains Liner trains with stops at siding International post and parcel-trains Automatic marshalling Liner trains duo-loco All remote controlled Endpoint-trains Liner trains fully automated loading International post and parcel-train network Train load Inter Modal Endpoint-trains High Speed Freight National post trains IT /monitoring systems Some different Standardized control system *) Adapted to market needs in each product and line 33 Full control of all trains and consignments

34 Thank you for your kind attention Bo-Lennart NELLDAL Project leader SP2 WP2.1 KTH Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm Sweden

35 Capacity for Rail SP2 NOVEL RAIL FREIGHT VEHICLES Dissemination meeting th June 2015 and TOUBOL ect Leader WP2.2

36 Capacity 4 Rail SP2 WP 2.2. The Process Task EU requests: Noise reduction Network Capacity IMPACT ON KPIs Economical feasability Insertion in Network 3 6 Customers requests to bridge gaps WP2.2 development Studies Simulations and Simulations Industry proposals Remaining to be done

37 Capacity 4 Rail SP2 WP 2.2. The customer demands Task Price Reduction Reliability Customer demands Gauge 3 7 Better train maoeuvrability capacity Train lengthening Less dead weight More usable length flexibility Pocket wagons for P400

38 Capacity 4 Rail SP2 WP 2.2. Industry proposals Task New wagon design New blocks study Industry proposals Impact of K blocks and LL Blocks Asset intelligence 3 8 Better use of train length Wagons interoperable for gauge B+ for P400 New braking system E P Brakes Disc brakes Increased Asset Utilization Enhanced productivity Reduced of operational and maintenance costs Extended range of services offered Higher flexibility of business models

39 pacity 4 Rail SP2 WP 2.2.Simulations Stability of new design and longer trains Task EOT impact SIMULATIONS Train lengthening on the network 3 9 Temperature according to braking system

40 pacity 4 Rail SP2 WP 2.2. WORK PROGRESS STVA has produced designs for new wagons to be studied by NTnetAB and KTH Van Dieren has presented his requirements to enhance its competitiveness Jointly we have all agreed that noise reduction is essential without penalizing the activity. Research on K and LL blocks beyong the status of the Europe Train conclusions will be developed in conjunction with new braking solutions. 4 0

41 pacity 4 Rail SP2 WP 2.2. WORK PROGRESS Innovative designs have been elaborated by STVA involving multi-axel axel articulated car carrier wagons Innovative design to increase the usable length of a train of a given length Possibility of reducing wear and tear of the wagon wheels if an electric command of the pneumatic brake was introduced 4 1

42 pacity 4 Rail SP2 WP 2.2. WORK PROGRESS Asset Intelligence (1) First, an overview was prepared by KB and NtnetAB containing an overview of use cases a qualitative assessment of use case feasibilities and impacts on the various stakeholders a functional system architecture of an asset intelligence unit morphological matrix on technical realisations exemplary monetary benefit calculations with a summary divided into different rail freight transport modes To avoid duplication of work, the paper was based on a report of the working group of telematics and sensor systems of TIS (Technical Innovation Circle for Rail Freight Transport), however in a condensed form and on the other hand with various modifications and additions for a more fruitful discussion in C4R 4 2

43 pacity 4 Rail SP2 WP 2.2. WORK PROGRESS Asset Intelligence (2) Second, NewOpera, STVA and VanDieren commented on the paper and the use cases The discussion showed that different stakeholders have different priorities of use cases and one conclusion was that if progress was financed by one stakeholder creating benefit to the others he should be rewarded in a way to be defined Further, a preliminary evaluation concluded that one of the most promising use cases in terms of possible monetary benefit and time saving is the automation of the train set-up, especially a more automated brake test Therefore, further work in C4R R will focus on this topic, starting with an analysis of current train set-up processes. This will also prepare the ground for faster progress in Shift2Rail 4 3

44 pacity 4 Rail SP2 WP 2.2. WORK METHODOLOGY For each of these topics the target is to develop the concept, to define the necessary simulations in particular as regards safety issues and to analyze what could be a business model When it appears necessary the simulation may have to be supported by tests on bench in particular when entering a field where no reference could give us the necessary intermediate results. In particular this could happen when analyzing the temperature of certain brake blocks submitted to less pressure to achieve the slowing down of a train when all wagons are simultaneously braking. 4 4

45 pacity 4 Rail SP2 WP WORK IN PROGRESS For new design simulations will involve wagon stability calculations in order to assess the safety of such trains incorporating these new wagons. With the new train braking and brake releasing characteristics we will analyze the train management improvements to assess the expected progress of reliability and hence of competitiveness. With the new design we will appreciate the gain in competitiveness due to the increase of usable capacity and the new market potentials.

46 pacity 4 Rail SP2 WP NEXT INTERACTIVE DISSEMINATION When achievable targets will be identified enabling to evaluate the impact on main KPIs a workshop involving stakeholders directly interested in the results will be organized. Such a workshop is to be organized on September 10th in Brussels for shippers, forwarders, forwarders combined transport operators, wagons keepers, wagon manufactures, equipment suppliers, IMs and Rus for an interactive presentation in order to validate the orientation of the research and fix the level of KPIs improvement to be reached. During this workshop a roadmap of progress will be discussed for a feasable implementation of the changes.

47 pacity 4 Rail SP2 WP 2.2. THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION 4 7

48 Capacity for Rail SP2 New Concepts for Efficient Freight systems WP 2.3 Co-modal modal transhipment and interchange/logistics Paris, 10/06/2015 Minutes of the meeting Stefano RICCI

49 Capacity 4 Rail WP 2.3 Tasks Conceptual terminals design methodology for different markets Identification of functional requirements of future terminals Application of design methodology for terminals innovative technologies Application of design methodology for terminals innovative operational measures Operational costs of newly designed terminals: business cases and cost-benefit benefit analyses Validation of terminals conceptual design and WP synthesis. 49 Task Work Plan Leader KTH M7 M12 DICEA M13 M18 TRV M19 M24 DICEA M19 M24 UNEW M25 M28 DICEA M29 M30

50 Capacity 4 Rail WP 2.3 Main achievements in Task and Definition of performances to be achieved by the terminals Definition of case studies for selected terminal typologies Selection of suitable methods to analyze these terminals Collection of input data on selected case studies - Rail-Road: Road: München Riem (Germany) intermodal freight terminal - Rail-Rail: Rail: Hallsberg (Sweden) marshalling yard - Rail-Sea: Sea: Valencia (Spain) maritime freight terminal Identification of key performance indicators by terminal typology Identification of potential future scenarios by terminal typology Pilot application of methods to test them on case studies

51 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Selection of methods (1) Analytical Method Generalized approach TOG = Σi=1..m TWi + Σj=1..n TOj 51

52 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Selection of methods (2) Simulation Tool (by Planimate ) Reproduction of operational reality (existing or future) Analysis and prediction of effects of infrastructural or operational changes Comparison of different design alternatives 52

53 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Collection of input data Definition of differentiated input parameters for models application - Intermodal freight terminal (Rail to Road) - Marshalling yard (Rail to Rail) - Maritime terminal (Rail to Sea) *Available on C4R website 53

54 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Identification of Key Performance Indicators (KPI) Key requirements - Sensibility to potential changes introduced by innovations - Meeting requests of relevant stakeholders - 13 for Rail to Road, 15 for Rail to Rail, 14 for Rail to Sea *Available on C4R website 54

55 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Identification of future scenarios Main inputs from WP2.1 and WP2.2 - Differentiated according to terminal typology - Including innovative technologies and/or operational measures 55 *Available on C4R website

56 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Rail-Road case study (1) DUSS Terminal München-Riem 56

57 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Rail-Road case study (2) Analytical Method: operational phases considered Waiting for the check-out in the rail area S RAILWAY GATE' TRANFER AREA (ST. AREA - TRAIN) STOCKING AREA TW1' Waiting for the 2st transfer in the train TO1' TW2' Movement from gate to the transfer area Waiting for st transfer TO2'the 1TW3' in the storage TO3' TW2'' TO6' TW5' TO4'' TW4' TW4'' TO3'' TRANFER AREA (QUAY) TO2'' Waiting before the exiting movement TO5' Check-out operation Waiting for the check-in TW5'' TO5'' TO6'' Check-in operation 1st transfer operation, unit in the storage TTR' (V' TTR'' (V'' 2st transfer operation, unit V'') in the train V') LEGEND: VEHICLE V' (TRAIN) (TRUCK) VEHICLE V" (SHIP) UNITS ENTERING ON V' UNITS ENTERING V" 57 Exiting movement TO4' TW3'' TO1'' MARITIME GATE'' TRUCK GATE TW6' TWi', TOi' TWi", TOi" TTR' TTR" = WAITING AND OPERATIONALTIMES FOR THE UNITS ON V' = WAITING AND OPERATIONALTIMES FOR THE UNITS ON V" = TRANSIT TIME FOR THE UNITS ENTERING ON V' = TRSNSIT TIME FOR THE UNITS ENTERING ON V" t

58 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Rail-Road case study (3) Analytical model: detailed results Indirect Handling: ITU - TTR Truck-Train = 4,73 [h] ITU - TTR Train-Truck = 2,40 [h] tal Transit Time U) Time period from the arrival of the freight unit (or vehicle) to the terminal gate from road (an external transport infrastructure) to the exit of the unit (or vehicle) from the terminal towards road or railway network. TTRv =vehicle total transit time (train and truck); TTRITU = Unit total transit time; TW = waiting time; TO = operational time. Direct Handling: ITU - TTR Truck-Train = 0,40 [h] ITU - TTR Train-Truck = 1,67 [h] Train: Dir. = 70%; Ind. = 30% V - TTR Train = 6,61 [h] tal Transit Time hicle) Truck (I): V - TTR Train = 4,78 [h] (D):V - TTR Truck = 0,51 [h] [ITU-TTTR] ITU Total Transit Time, Indirect Handling TW"2 TO"2 TW"3 TO"3 TW"4 TO"4 TW'5 TO'5 TW'6 TO'6 min 0,82 5,83 0,11 4,87 14,16 62,86 41,00 3,07 0,00 5,26 3,00 3,00 Waiting and operational time [min] TW"1 TO"1 [ITU-TTTR] ITU Total Transit Time, Indirect Handling 250 Single phases duration [min] Single phases duration [min] 70 TW'1 TO'1 TW'2 TO'2 TW'3 TO'3 TW'4 TO'4 TW''5 TO''5 TW''6 TO''6 min 6,25 3,75 0,00 2,10 1,05 3,07 256, 3,07 0,04 1,44 0,67 5,83 Waiting and operational time [min]

59 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Rail-Road case study (4) Example of customised Simulation model: Handling Module 2-2 rail mounted gantry cranes [RMG] - 5 operative Rail track - 2 storage lines - 2 operative road lanes 59

60 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Rail-Road case study (5) Construction of scenarios: compatibility among new operational measures and technologies 60

61 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Rail-Road case study (6) Preliminary set of scenarios to be evaluated 61

62 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Rail-Rail case study Hallsberg Marshalling Yard 62

63 Capacity 4 Rail WP2.3 Rail-Sea case study Port of Valencia - Principe Felipe Railway Terminal Located in South-East East part of public container terminal Total area: 50,000 m2 4 tracks in loading/unloading area + 1 track for manoeuvring locomotives Electrified tracks until the loading/unloading area 2 road access to railway terminal 2 storage areas: 9,000 m2 + 20,000 m2 63

64 Capacity 4 Rail WP 2.3 Deliverable Final D2.3 Contents Methodology and requirements for conceptual co-modal terminals design Synopsis of newly designed co-modal terminals Integrated design of innovative co-modal Terminals Economic appraisal of newly designed comodal terminals Collaborative project SCP3-GA Increased Capacity 4 Rail networks through enhanced infrastructure and optimised operations FP7-SST-2013-RTD-1 Deliverable (Intermediate) D2.3.1 Co-modal transshipments and terminals Due date of deliverable : 09/2015 (M24) Deliverable (Final) D Deliverable Nature Dissemination level Co-modal transshipments and terminals D23.1 Report (R) Public (PU) Due date of deliverable : 03/2016 (M30) D23.2 Report (R) Public (PU)