Upload
dinhquynh
View
230
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Technical-economical comparison
of Maglev and High Speed Systems
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 2 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Content
1. Basis of the LCC Analysis Method2. Comparison of the Technology between Wheel-on-Rail and Maglev3. System Comparison 4. Identification of the Quantity and Cost Frameworks 5. Analysis of the LCC 6. Summary of Evaluation
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 3 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Basis of the LCC Analysis
Termination of Operation
Initial Operation
Operation
Development
Construction
Prototype
Test
Serial-Production
Waste disposal Life-phases
100%
80%
50%
ConstructionProduction OperationCost determination
Cost development
Determination and development of LCC
Life-cycle phases
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 4 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Basis of the LCC Analysis
Cost Element:Failure costs of the propulsion system in the operation phase of the life cycle.
ComponentPropulsionSystem
Cost TypesCost type :Failure Costs
Life-cycle: Operation
Tech
nica
lstru
ctur
e
Life-cycle phases
Cost Matrix Model
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 5 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Basis of the LCC Analysis
Dissassembly Disposal
Special tools
Scrapping
Vehicles
Initial equipment
Training Trial Operations
Initial Operation
Investment Operation
Termination of operation
Waste Disposal / Re-selling
Operations
Operational disturbance
Spares Inventory
Maintenance
Repair
Preparation
Work
Consumption parts
Spares
Special work tools
Energy
Induced costs
Disposal
Financial costs
Personel
n Simplified LCC Model for the comparison of Railway Systems
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 6 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Comparison of the Technology betweenWheel-on-Rail and Maglev Technique
0,2 – 0,51 kg/cm²(approx.) 3)
Low area loadLittle wear
No contactMaglev (Transrapid)
2,6 – 4,55000 – 10000 kg/cm²(approx.)1) 2)
High point loadHeavy wear
Through contactsWheel-on-rail
Track main-tenance costs in
percentage of initial capital
Mechanicallystressed due to
carrying (static load)
Load EffectFunction of carrying
guiding andpropulsion
Type of guidedsystem
Mechanical stresses and costs of track maintenance
1) Passenger coach and ICE end power car respectively
2) Mean additional dynamic element for wheel-on-rail approx. 30%
3) Mean additional dynamic element for maglev approx. 10%
Maglev system Wheel-on-rail
PropulsionCarrying
Guidance Guidance
PropulsionCarrying
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 7 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Comparison of the Technology betweenWheel-on-Rail and Maglev Technique
gradient (max 4%)
gradient (max 10%)Transrapid(Propulsion integrated in guideway)
Wheel-on-rail(Propulsion in the train)
Alignment Parameters
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 8 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Comparison of the Technology betweenWheel-on-Rail and Maglev Technique
705m
ICE
Transrapid
300 km/h
1400m1590m
3200mICE
Transrapid
2825mat 400 km/h
Transrapid
200 km/h
Curve radius
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 9 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Comparison of the Technology betweenWheel-on-Rail and Maglev Technique
Crest and Sag of the High Speed Systems
Wheel/Rail System ICE3 Maglev Transrapid
Crest Sag Crest Sag
Vertical Acceleration 0,5 m/s² 0,6 m/s² 0,6 m/s² 1,2 m/s²
Design Speed 200 km/h 6.400 m 5.200 m 5.150 m 2.600 m
300 km/h 14.400 m 11.700 m 11.600 m 5.790 m
330 km/h 17.400 m 14.200 m 14.000 m 7.000 m
400 km/h - - 20.600 m 10.300 m
450 km/h - - 26.000 m 13.000 m
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 10 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Comparison of the Technology betweenWheel-on-Rail and Maglev Technique
Guideway
At grade guideway Typ III
2,75 m
0,4 m 6,19 m
24,76 m 1 m
12 m
Elevated guideway Typ II
Elevated guideway Typ I
49,536 m
2 m
25 m
2,5
– 10
m
< 3,
5 m
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 11 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
System Comparison
54%
Total mass:
Number of seats (standard config.):
Number of sections:
Specific mass per seat:
318 t (247 t unladen)
446 (approx. 36t)
5 (approx. 64 t/car)
0,63 t/seat
2) 3)
1)
Equipment16%
Passengers11%
Bodywork22%
Mass balance Cost balance
1) 80 kg per person with luggage2) Laden mass (passengers and equipment)3) Basis configuration of TR 08
Equipment11%
Bodywork27%
Assembly/Commis-sioning
5%
Length of vehicle: 129 m
Batteries3%Batteries
5%
Magnetic drive, etc.Hovering frameLevitation/guidingsystem;Eddy-currentbrake;Electricalequipment
46%
Magnetic drive, etc.Hovering frameLevitation/guidingsystem;Eddy-current brake;Electricalequipment
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 12 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
System Comparison
Total mass: 442 t (408 t unladen) 2)
Number of seats (standard config.): 415 (approx. 33 t)1)
Number of cars: 8 (approx. 55 t/car)Specific mass per seat: 0.99 t/seat
Equipment26%
Passengers7%
Bodywork20%
1) 80 kg per person with luggage2) Laden mass (i.e. including passengers)
Equipment18%
Assembly/Commis-sioning10%
Length of vehicle: 200 m
Bodywork27%
Running gearEnergy SupplyPropulsion(7%)OnboardcontrolAux. groups
48%
Mass balance Cost balanceRunning gearEnergy SupplyPropulsion (13%)
OnboardcontrolAux. groups
44%
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 13 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
System ComparisonVehicle
Parameter Wheel/Rail Maglev System
Carriages/Sections per Train 8 5
Seats 415 (+ 24 in the dining car) 446
Operational speed 300 km/h 450 km/h
Max. engine power 8000 KW 25000 KW
Net weight of the train 409 t 247 t
Weight / Seat Approx. 930 kg Approx. 550 kg
Total length of train 200m 128 m
Width 2,95 m 3,70 m
Heigth 3,89 m 4,16 m
Axel load 17 t (2,1 t/m) 2,2 t/m
Wheel on Rail SystemParameters
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 14 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
System Comparison
Energy Supply Propulsion Vehicle Signal & Control System
= =
= 3~
Vehicle
Cable along track
Brake adjuster/Brake resistors
Power Station 3~ 110 kV 50 Hz
3~ 20 kV 50 Hz
1~ 110 kV 16 2/3 Hz
1~ 15 kV 16 2/3 Hz
Overhead catenary 1~15-kV-16 2/3-Hz
3~ =
3~ =
Linear motor
Alternating Current converter
Incoming energy converter
Transformer Substation High-voltage transformer
Energy converter transformer
Outgoing transformer
FM Locomotive Transformer
Alternating Current converor
Traction motor Gear Box
1~ =
4-qs
Power Station
DCS
BLF BLT
Contact rail Radio
Subsystems for Maglev and Wheel/Rail System
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 15 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
System ComparisonComparison of general system structure
Subsystem Maglev Wheel on rail
Vehicle Maglev vehicleVehicle-OCS
Vehicleincl. Propulsion components and OCS
Operations controlsystem Operation center,
control facilities,Radio facilities
Signal box, ETCS
Propulsion/Conductor rail
Substation (incl. current converter),Incoming current converter, Intermediate
circuit, Braking chopper,Inverter, Output converter,
Track cable, Stator windings,Feeder rail
Overhead catenary
Energy supply Power Station, local energy network (3~ 110 kV 50 Hz),
High voltage converter,3~ 20 kV 50 Hz
Power station,railway energy supply network
(1~ 110 kV 16,7 Hz), SubstationGuideway At grade, elevated At grade
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 16 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
System Comparison
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time
Transrapid run
ICE 3 run
km/h
min
Spee
d
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 17 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
System Comparison
0,0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1,0
m/s²
1,4
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Speed
Acc
eler
atio
n
km/h
ICE 3
Class-146 + 5 double-deck coaches
Metrorapid (DU airport – DUI Hbf.)ICE-T (class 411)
1
23456
ICE 3Class-425 EMU
Class-145 + 5 double-deck coaches
1
23456
1
2
3
4
5
6aa
( a : mean acceleration)
Rail systems
= 0,23 m/s²
aa = 0,36 m/s²
aa = 0,46 m/s²
aa = 0,78 m/s²
aa = 0,32 m/s² 1)
aa = 0,27 m/s²
1) Vmax = 200 km/h; = 0,41 m/s²a
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 18 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
System Comparison
Wheel/Rail modifiedMAGLEV
MAGLEV
running time including timetable reserves
32 min. 32 min. 21 min.
Design Speed 300 km/h 246 km/h 450 km/h
Energy supply Substation 15 kV Substation 20 kV Substation 20 kV
Traction energy consumption
62,2 GWh/a 44,1 GWh/a 89,6 GWh/a
secondary energy consumption
6,2 GWh/a 13,2 GWh/a 13, 2 GWh/a
Energy consumption
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 19 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Identification of the Quantity and Cost FrameworksCost Structure of the system comparison
Investment Costs Operational CostsInfrastructure costs
Land requirementGuideway / trackPower supplyPropulsion/feederOperation control systemNoise protection
Vehicle CostsOther Costs
FacilitiesPlanning costs
Personnel costs
Energy Costs
Maintenance Costs
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 20 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Identification of the Quantity and Cost FrameworksComparison of the Investments Costs
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Land
requ
iremen
t
Guidew
ay/ tr
ack
Propuls
ion/ fe
eder
Power
supp
ly
Operat
ion co
ntrol
syste
m
Other c
osts
Vehicle
Total in
vestm
ent
Cost Group
Mio
. € ICE
Transrapid(with cost reduction
Transrapid(without cost reduction
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 21 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Comparison of Personnel Costs
Identification of the Quantity and Cost Frameworks
2821
41
2
29
133
21
2
39
178
12 12
5252
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Operation Management
Train Personnel Station Personnel Cleaning of stations
Cleaningtrains
Administration Total
EMPLOYERS
ICETransrapid
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 22 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Comparison of Maintenance Costs
Identification of the Quantity and Cost Frameworks
PropulsionEnergy Supply
Feeder
Energy Supply
Operation ControlSystem
Stations
Guideway
Vehicle
Total
ICE Maintenance Costs
Maglev Maintenance Costs
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 23 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
System Comparison
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Maintenance costs
Energy costsTotal
Mill
ions
of e
uros
MaglevICE
Operation materials
Operation personel
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 24 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Analysis of the LCC
MaglevICE
Year
Periodic Cost Development
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 25 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Analysis of the LCCTotal Cost Development for Maglev and for Rail
-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
Year
Wheel/Rail
Maglev
Maglev (with costreduction)
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 26 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Noise emission
89869291
7988
758584
7280
80 km/h 200 250 300 400 450
S-B
ahn
Tran
srap
id 0
7IC
E 1+
2TG
V-A
Tran
srap
id 0
7IC
E 1+
2TG
V-A
Tran
srap
id 0
7
200 km/h 400 km/h300 km/h80 km/h 250 km/h 450 km/hTr
ansr
apid
07
Tran
srap
id 0
7IC
E 1+
2
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 27 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Journey time Comparison
Distance [km]
Ove
rall
jour
ney
times
[min
]
Times to/from terminals: Maglev and WoR: 35 minAircraft 80 min
ICE 3 300 km/h
Maglev 450 km/h
Aircraft
n Journey time
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 28 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
System Comparison
Hourly performance of carriers
Cap
acity
(pas
seng
erpe
r hou
r)
Headway [min]
Maglev, 10 sectionsWheel-on-Rail, two ICE 3Maglev, 5 sectionsWheel-on-Rail, one ICE 3B777-300A 320
Witt,Enders/24.04.2006/060424_Presentation_L-Blow.ppt/Page 29 of 29
Technical-economical comparison ofMaglev and High Speed Systems
Summary of Evaluation
n Potential Cost Savings of the High Speed Maglev System
n High Speed Maglev System has Lower Costs than the Wheel-on-Rail System
n High Speed Maglev System has Lower Maintenance Expenses than the Wheel-on-Rail System
n High Speed Maglev System has Lower Life Cycle Costs than the Wheel-on-Rail System
n Environmentally Compatible Operation
n Macro-economical Benefits