Upload
phungmien
View
219
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The MAGLEV Project Evaluation Method: Based on Stochastic Life Cycle Cost Approach
Ph.D. Hyunchul, Choi
July 9, 2013
1
Chair Committee: Lawrence Chiarelli
Fletcher (Bud) Griffis
Andrew Bates
John Falcocchio
Bharat Rao8/24/2016
Researcher’s Background• Academic History
– BS in Mechanical Engineering at Yonsei University (2005)
– MS in Project Management at Northwestern University (2009)
• Publication
– Design of Public Projects: Outsource or In-House? (Journal of
Management in Engineering, ASCE)
– Large Scale Storage of Electrical Energy Using Maglev
(Maglev 2011 International Conference)
– Adaptation of Existing Railroad Trackage for Levitated Maglev
Vehicle Operation (Maglev 2011 International Conference)
– The Maglev America Project: A 28,800 mile national Maglev
network (Maglev 2011 International Conference)
8/24/2016 2
Table of Contents
• The Motivation
• The Problem Statement
• Literature Review
– Magnetic Levitation
– Life Cycle Cost Analysis
– Stochastic Method
• Importance of the Research
8/24/2016 3
Table of Contents
• Research Questions
• Research Methodology
– Markov Chain Model for the Maglev
– Data collection and analysis
a) Maglev initial capital cost
b) Maglev operation and maintenance cost
• Conclusions and Further research
8/24/2016 4
Motivation
• The Maglev System are becoming one of
alternative for the future transportation mode
– Environmental Benefits
– Social Benefits
– Economical Benefits
• The system is shifting from a technical research
stage to a commercial operation stage
– China (Shanghai Transrapid), Korea (UTM-03)
– Japan (Yamanashi, Linimo)
8/24/2016 5
The Problem Statements
• The purpose of this study is to provide the frame
work for predicting the Maglev’s Life Cycle Cost
based on the commercial operation and
maintenance data by using the stochastic
methodology.
8/24/2016 6
Literature Review
• The Fundament in the Magnetic Levitation
– The mechanism illustration
8/24/2016 7
• Propulsion
• Levitation
• Stabilization
• Quadrupole
Magnet
Magnetic Levitation
• State of the art in Magnetic Levitation
– There are two basic systems
• EMS, Electromagnetic attractive force system
• EDS, Superconducting repulsive force system
– 1st Gen. Dipole magnet
» Low strength, High magnetic field in the vehicle
– 2nd Gen. Quadrupole magnet
» High strength, Low magnetic field in the vehicle
» No prototype as yet developed
8/24/2016 8
Magnetic Levitation
• Electromagnetic Suspension (EMS)
– The technical characteristics
8/24/2016 9
Characteristics
Advantages• Commercial Operation History
• The lower magnetic field strength
• No wheel assistant system for the levitation
Disadvantages• Complex servomechanism to control a 1 cm gap
• Extreme structure tolerance and extreme high
cost in guideway construction
Magnetic Levitation
• Electromagnetic Suspension (EMS)
– The current operation model
8/24/2016 10
Linimo in JapanShanghai
TranspidUTM-02 in Korea
Magnetic Levitation
• Electrodynamic Suspension (EDS)
– The technical characteristics
8/24/2016 11
Characteristics
Advantages
• Above 10cm gap is allowed
• This system has the highest speed record
• Liquid nitrogen level superconducting magnet
has been introduced
• Quadrupole system operates on existing RR
Disadvantages
• Strong magnet field (Dipole Magnet)
• Wheel Assistant System for levitation
(Dipole Magnet)
• Quadrupole system has not been fully tested
Magnetic Levitation
• Electrodynamic Suspension (EDS)
– The current developing model
8/24/2016 12
Yamanashi line in Japan Maglev 2000 in U.S
Magnetic Levitation
• Comparison of guideway designs (EMS & EDS)
8/24/2016 13
• German Maglev: Uses Attractive Force. High Energy Consuming
Conventional Electromagnets. Ultra-Engineering Tolerances and
Complex Control Required to Maintain Narrow Air Gap of 3/8th
inch. Difficult Weather and Seismic Issues.
• Japanese Maglev: Uses Repulsive Force. Low Energy Consuming
Superconducting Di-Pole Magnets. Large Air Gap (4-6 inches) U-
Shape Creates Weather Issues. High magnetic field
• U.S. Maglev: Uses Repulsive Force. Low Energy Consuming
Superconducting Quadrupole Magnets. Fringe field approximate
the ambient Earth field. Large Air Gap (4-6 inches.) Inherently
strongly stable. No weather or seismic issues. Operation on the
existing railroad
LCC Analysis
• Life Cycle Cost (LCC) Analysis
– LCC Analysis is defined as “an economic evaluation
technique that determines the total cost of owning and
operating a facility over period of time”.
– The effectiveness of using LCC Analysis is listed as
followed:
a. Evaluating alternatives in the economic feasibility
b. Recognizing of the true total cost
c. Supporting for preparing the future cost plan
d. Providing the resources for the decision-making
8/24/2016 14
LCC Analysis
• Life Cycle Cost (LCC) Analysis
– Fundamental cost elements in LCC:
𝐋𝐂𝐂 = 𝑪𝒄𝒂𝒑𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒍 + 𝑪𝒐𝒘𝒏𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒉𝒊𝒑 + 𝑪𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒑𝒐𝒔𝒂𝒍
– In the LCC, the relationship between the value and time
𝑷𝑽 =𝑭𝑽
𝟏 + 𝒊 𝒏, (𝒘𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒆 𝒊 = 𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒕 𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒏 = 𝒏𝒖𝒎𝒃𝒆𝒓 𝒐𝒇 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒐𝒅)
– The Equivalent Annual Cost (EAC)
𝑬𝑨𝑪 =𝑵𝑷𝑽
𝑨𝒏,𝒊, 𝑨𝒏,𝒊 =
𝟏 − (𝟏 + 𝒊)−𝒏
𝒊
8/24/2016 15
Stochastic Methods
• Monte Carlo Method
– The Monte Carlo Methods provide approximate solution
to a variety of mathematical problems by performing
statistical sampling experiments.
• Markov Chain Analysis
– The Markov Chain analysis is a stochastic process
characterized as memoryless which is a markov property.
– It has the conditional probability distribution of a future
state given by the present states function alone
8/24/2016 16
The Importance of this Research
• It provides the frame work for predicting
Maglev’s Life Cycle Capital, Operation, and
Maintenance Cost considering uncertainty.
• It provides the method for calculating the
commercial viability of Maglev system such as
revenue (ticket price) vs. all cost.
• Finally, it also provides the basis for comparison
analysis among the different Maglev technologies.
8/24/2016 17
Research Questions
• The Maglev systems’ initial capital cost and risk
associated with that cost
• The Maglev systems’ operation and maintenance
behavior, cost and risk associated with that cost
8/24/2016 18
Research Questions
– The Maglev systems’(EMS and EDS) future initial
capital cost behaviors
a. The initial capital cost has a large deviation due to
the uncertainty in the cost elements
b. The EMS Maglev construction cost will be higher
than EDS Maglev due to EMS’s technical
characteristics
8/24/2016 19
Research Questions
– The Maglev systems’ operation and maintenance cost
behaviors
a. The maglev operation condition deterioration
during the life period is a limited due to its
technical characteristics.
b. The Maglev’s operation and maintenance behavior
will have the Markov property characteristics.
c. Due to the EMS Maglev’s 1 cm gap requirement, its
O&M cost will higher than other Maglev system.
8/24/2016 20
Research Methodology
8/24/2016 21
• Markov Chain Model for the Maglev
– The “Markov Chain Model” is name after Andrey Markov
– It also is characterized as memoryless property or Markov
property: the next system state depends only on the current
system state and not on the sequence of state transition that
preceded it.
– This can be expressed as:
𝑷𝒓 𝑿𝒕+𝟏 = 𝒋 𝑿𝟎 = 𝒌𝟎,𝑿𝟏 = 𝒌𝟏,⋯ ,𝑿𝒕 = 𝒊 = 𝑷𝒓{𝑿𝒕+𝟏= 𝒋 𝑿𝒕 = 𝒊}
– The daily operation & maintenance cost is the function of
the system state
Research Methodology
• Markov Chain Model for the Maglev
– Terms in the Markov Chain Model
a. Time: in a Markov chain, the system is observed at
discrete points in time.
b. State: The state describes the situation at a point.
c. Transition probability: The set of possible events
and their probabilities depend on the state.
d. Transition Matrix: It is the matrix which is
consisted with the set of transition probability in the
system
8/24/2016 22
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (Capital Cost)
– Maglev System initial capital cost characteristics from
the Maglev cost estimation data from Incheon Airport
project.
a. Construction cost estimation and Probability data
b. Each cost items is stochastically independent
c. The Maglev initial construction cost has been
simulated using the Monte Carlo techniques.
– The probability data are obtained from the Canadian
railway cost data.
8/24/2016 23
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (Capital Cost)
8/24/2016 24
Observed Maglev Cost Estimates
Observed Maglev Cost Estimates
Canadian Risk Information in the
Railway
Canadian Risk Information in the
Railway
PDFPDF
j = nj = n
j = j + 1j = j + 1
NONO
YESYES
ResultResult
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (Capital Cost)
8/24/2016 25
Earth Work 3,846,000
Structure Work 62,761,000
Water Management Facility & Equip. 1,033,000
Temporary Facility 5,467,000
Relocation Construction 1,557,000
Main Material Cost for Construction 15,781,000
Guideway 68,733,000
Architecture 20,910,000
Mechanical Equip Purchasing 27,194,000
Overhead 23,643,000
Other Cost 15,509,000
Construction Cost Sub Total 246,434,000
Design Cost 21,576,000
Total Cost 268,010,000
MAGLEV project construction cost estimate (USD)
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (Capital Cost)
8/24/2016 26
Subsystem Cost Range in the Railway Construction from
Ministry of transportation in Ontario Canada
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (Capital Cost)
– The EMS Maglev initial construction cost
8/24/2016 27
• Mean:
$ 251 million
• Standard Deviation:
$ 4.7 million
• 80% Chance Value:
$ 255 million
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
a. The Markov Chain Model provides the tool for
predicting the daily Maglev operation behavior.
b. The Maglev O&M costs are estimated by the
expected value of the operation behavior
probability and the observation of Maglev O&M
cost data.
c. The discount rate also is taken from the Korean
commerce department statistics.
8/24/2016 28
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
a. The Markov Chain probability matrix and O&M
cost data are obtained from 2 years operation and
maintenance data of the UTM-02 Maglev system
b. This Maglev system is divided into 6 sub-systems:
Vehicle, Guideway, Power supply, Power control,
Signal and Communication system
8/24/2016 29
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– The case for evaluating the proposed model
a. Feb. 2006 ~ Aug. 2012
b. App. $ 371 million
c. Evaluation of Maglev
Commercial Operation
d. Incheon International
Airport Complex
e. App. 6.1 km distance
8/24/2016 30
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
8/24/2016 31
State 1Clean
State 2 Normal
State 3Failure
Observed Daily Cost-Condition DataObserved Daily Cost-Condition Data
Observed Daily Operation Report
Observed Daily Operation Report
Develop the transition
probabilities from RFH
Develop the transition
probabilities from RFH
ResultResult
𝑷𝒏, 𝒏 = 𝟏,⋯𝟗𝟎MCM
𝑷𝒏, 𝒏 = 𝟏,⋯𝟗𝟎MCM
𝑷𝒎𝒏
𝒏 = 𝟏,⋯𝟗𝟎𝒎 = 𝟏,⋯𝟓𝟎
MCS
𝑷𝒎𝒏
𝒏 = 𝟏,⋯𝟗𝟎𝒎 = 𝟏,⋯𝟓𝟎
MCS
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
8/24/2016 32
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
a. Developing the transition probability matrix
8/24/2016 33
State 1Clean
State 2 Normal
State 3Failure
• 3 states
• 9 path between the states
• Frequency Histogram by
counting the states
transition activities in the
daily operation report
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
a. Developing the transition probability matrix
8/24/2016 34
• 9 probabilities in the
transition matrix
• Each probabilities stands
for transition activities
between the states
• 7 transition probability
matrices
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
b. Developing the frequency histograms
8/24/2016 35
366
12 8 7
102
8 12 4 00
20406080
100120140160180200220240260280300320340360380400420440460480500520
11 12 13 21 22 23 31 32 33
Number of transition in the vehicle condition
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
b. Developing the frequency histograms
8/24/2016 36
312
13 0 9
180
3 2 0 00
20406080
100120140160180200220240260280300320340360380400420440460480500520
11 12 13 21 22 23 31 32 33
Number of transition in the guideway condition
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
b. Developing the frequency histograms
8/24/2016 37
485
8 2 7 15 0 2 0 00
20406080
100120140160180200220240260280300320340360380400420440460480500520
11 12 13 21 22 23 31 32 33
Number of transition in the power supply system condition
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
b. Developing the frequency histograms
8/24/2016 38
505
5 2 5 0 0 2 0 00
20406080
100120140160180200220240260280300320340360380400420440460480500520
11 12 13 21 22 23 31 32 33
Number of transition in the power control system condition
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
b. Developing the frequency histograms
8/24/2016 39
297
2 3 2 0 0 4 0
211
020406080
100120140160180200220240260280300320340360380400420440460480500520
11 12 13 21 22 23 31 32 33
Number of transition in the signal system condition
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
b. Developing the frequency histograms
8/24/2016 40
495
1 8 1 3 0 8 0 30
20406080
100120140160180200220240260280300320340360380400420440460480500520
11 12 13 21 22 23 31 32 33
Number of transition in the communication system condition
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
b. Developing the frequency histograms
8/24/2016 41
232
234
21
223
6 5 5 00
20406080
100120140160180200220240260280300320340360380400420440460480500520
11 12 13 21 22 23 31 32 33
Number of transition in the operation condition
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
c. Developing the transit probability matrix
8/24/2016 42
Vehicle
P 1 2 3 Total
1 0.948 0.031 0.021 1.000
2 0.060 0.872 0.068 1.000
3 0.749 0.250 0.001 1.000
Guideway
P 1 2 3 Total
1 0.959 0.040 0.001 1.000
2 0.047 0.938 0.015 1.000
3 0.998 0.001 0.001 1.000
Power Supply
P 1 2 3 Total
1 0.980 0.016 0.004 1.000
2 0.318 0.681 0.001 1.000
3 0.998 0.001 0.001 1.000
Power Control
P 1 2 3 Total
1 0.986 0.010 0.004 1.000
2 0.998 0.001 0.001 1.000
3 0.998 0.001 0.001 1.000
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
c. Developing the transit probability matrix
8/24/2016 43
Signal
P 1 2 3 Total
1 0.983 0.007 0.010 1.000
2 0.998 0.001 0.001 1.000
3 0.019 0.001 0.980 1.000
Communication
P 1 2 3 Total
1 0.982 0.002 0.016 1.000
2 0.250 0.749 0.001 1.000
3 0.726 0.001 0.273 1.000
Operation
P 1 2 3 Total
1 0.896 0.089 0.015 1.000
2 0.084 0.892 0.024 1.000
3 0.500 0.499 0.001 1.000
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
8/24/2016 45
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
8/24/2016 46
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
8/24/2016 47
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
8/24/2016 48
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
8/24/2016 49
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
8/24/2016 50
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
8/24/2016 51
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
8/24/2016 52
State 1 daily cost State 2 daily cost State 3 daily cost
Operation 940,175 (Korean Won) 940,175 (Korean Won) 0 (Korean Won)
Vehicle 195,695 (Korean Won) 195,695 (Korean Won) 813,258 (Korean Won)
Guideway 195,695 (Korean Won) 457,871 (Korean Won) 24,013,028 (Korean Won)
Power supply 195,695 (Korean Won) 195,695 (Korean Won) 645,695 (Korean won)
Power control 195,695 (Korean Won) 195,695 (Korean Won) 195,695 (Korean Won)
Signal 195,695 (Korean Won) 195,695 (Korean Won) 195,695 (Korean Won)
Communication 195,695 (Korean Won) 195,695 (Korean Won) 195,695 (Korean Won)
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Maglev Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Cost
e. Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) with Markov Chain
Probability information (50 times trial)
f. The expected Maglev’s O&M cost is estimated
following the function:
𝑬[𝒇(𝑿𝒏)] = 𝑷𝒏 ∙ 𝑪𝒔
• 𝑓 𝑋𝑛 = the system cost at the state 𝑋𝑛
• 𝑃𝑛 = the transition matrix
• 𝐶𝑠 = the state cost
8/24/2016 53
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– The annual EMS Maglev operation cost
8/24/2016 54
• Mean:
$ 300,500
• Standard Deviation:
$ 605.85
• 80% Chance Value:
$ 300,900
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– The annual EMS Maglev maintenance cost
8/24/2016 55
• Mean:
$ 527,120
• Standard Deviation:
$ 823.72
• 80% Chance Value:
$ 527,966
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (O&M Cost)
– Comparison of observation data and prediction data
– The difference between the observation data and model
prediction in the maintenance cost is 4.7%
8/24/2016 56
Annual MAGLEV operation and maintenance data from the model USD 827,620
Annual MAGLEV operation data from the model USD 300,500
Annual MAGLEV maintenance data from the model USD 527,120
Observed annual MAGLEV maintenance data USD 503,283
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (LCC Analysis)
– The Maglev EAC of the life cycle 20 years
8/24/2016 57
• Mean:
$ 24.5 million
• Standard Deviation:
$ 0.42 million
• 80% Chance Value:
$ 24.9 million
Research Methodology
• Data Collection and Analysis (Comparison
Analysis)
– The cost comparison between EMS and EDS Maglev
systems. The EDS system data was obtained from the
recent NYSERDA study.
8/24/2016 58
EMS EDS
Guideway Construction Cost per mile $35.06 mil. $32.14 mil.
O&M Cost per passenger mile (USD) $0.73 $0.11
Conclusions and Further research
8/24/2016 59
• Findings
– This research presents that the expected construction cost
of EMS MAGLEV $251 million and the expected annual
operation and maintenance cost of EMS MAGLEV for
$0.8 million.
– The expected values of EAC in EMS Maglev is $24.5
million.
– In the cost comparison analysis between EMS and EDS,
the EDS system is 9% cheaper in the initial cost. In the
O&M cost , the EMS system is 6 times as expensive.
Conclusions and Further research
8/24/2016 60
• Conclusion
– The combination of Markov Chain model and Monte
Carlo method provides basis for predicting the MAGLEV
operation and maintenance behavior over the certain
period.
– This combination also provides a basis for LCC analysis
for systems with incomplete or uncertain data.
– In an addition, this combination can be used in the
comparing the various MAGLEV technologies.
Conclusions and Further research
8/24/2016 61
• Further research
– Comparison Analysis with other transportation modes
(High Speed Railway)
– Maglev Subway system LCC analysis with the proposed
model
– EDS Maglev system LCC analysis with the proposed
model