Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Tram and LRT Depots Experiences after 20 years of Low-Floor Vehicles
29.04.2015
• About VCDB
• Tram development
• High-Floor
• Low Floor 1st gen
• Low Floor 2nd gen
• Maintenance
• Different maintenance philosophies
• Scheduled / heavy maintenance
• Some recommendations for design
Content
1
3
2
Our shareholders
74,9 % 25,1 %
Facts & Figures
Gesellschafter Dresdner Verkehrsbetriebe AG
Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe AöR
Quality Management DIN EN ISO 9001:2008
Environment audit DIN EN ISO 14001:2009
Standorte Dresden, Berlin
Business Units Rail Vehicle Technology
Transport Planning /
Transport Engineering
Traffic Telematics
Infrastructure Planning
Electric Mobility
Assistance in Operation
Stammkapital 100.000 EUR Managing Director Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Flügge
Mitarbeiter 33 (per 01.05.2010)
Umsatz 2009 3,63 Mio. EUR
Projects Approx. 80 in process
Gesellschafter Dresdner Verkehrsbetriebe AG
Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe AöR
Standorte Dresden, Berlin
Gesellschafter Dresdner Verkehrsbetriebe AG
Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe AöR
Mitarbeiter 33 (per 01.05.2010) Standorte Dresden, Berlin
Gesellschafter Dresdner Verkehrsbetriebe AG
Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe AöR
Stammkapital 100.000 EUR
Mitarbeiter 33 (per 01.05.2010) Standorte Dresden, Berlin
Gesellschafter Dresdner Verkehrsbetriebe AG
Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe AöR
Turnover 2013 4.72 m EUR
Share Capital 200,000 EUR
Employees 45 (as of 2015/04/15) Offices Dresden, Berlin, Magdeburg
Foundation 1994 as VCDH VerkehrsConsult Dresden-Hamburg GmbH
2005 renamed as VCDB VerkehrsConsult Dresden-Berlin GmbH
Shareholders Dresdner Verkehrsbetriebe AG
Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe AöR
1
3
2
Two highlights for today's topic - vehicles
• VCDB was until today resposible for the construction supervision of
more than 800 trams/LRVs/EMU/DMU.
Quelle:
www.wikipedia.org
(30.09.2014)
Tender design for depot in Bergen/Norway (2010 – 2012)
Design (all phases) of new tram/bus depot Leipzig-Doelitz (since 2011)
Feasibility study for extension of main workshop Dresden (2013 – 2014)
Design support for tram workshops in Toronto, Ottawa, Missisauga / Canada
(2010 – 2013)
Draft Design Depot Nova Huta of MPK Krakau / Poland (2008 - 2009)
Depot Concept North of Magdeburger Verkehrsbetriebe GmbH (2007 - 2009)
Depot Trachenberge of Dresdner Verkehrsbetriebe AG (since 2006)
Depot Wissenhage of VVL De Lijn / Belgium (2004)
Workshop concept tram Sofia / Bulgaria (2007)
Workshop concept Yarra Trams Melbourne / Australia (2007)
Depot Reick of DVB AG (2005 – 2007)
Planning of a maintenance plant for railway passenger cars and trainsets in Leipzig-Wahren (1999 - 2000)
Central workshop Dresden-Gorbitz of DVB AG (2003 – 2006)
Bus depot Gruna of DVB AG (1997 – 1999)
Selection of Projects
Focus
Planning and Project Management for Depots and Workshop (Bus, Rail)
6
• High floor vehicles – still in operation
Gothenburg Wuerzburg Chemnitz…
Tram development
Quelle:
http://www.nahverkehr-
franken.de/strassenbahn/img_wagen/wsb_244.jpg
Quelle:
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/M28_%28sp%C3%A5rvagn%29#/
media/File:Tram_in_G%C3%B6teborg,_Sweden.jpg
Quelle:
http://tatra-chemnitz.npage.de/
• High floor vehicles – characteristics
- key parameters
massive underframe construction
carbody construction as „simple“ frame
electric components below / in underframe
high mechanical share
roof to a large extend empty
- decades of experience
Tram development
• Low floor vehicles – first generation
Dresden NGT6DD, Frankfurt R-Wagen…
Tram development
Quelle:
VCDB
Quelle:
http://www.abload.de%2Fimg%2Fr025abbiegenzurschwab3ecq.jpg
• Low floor vehicles, first generation
- Variations
70% LF, 100%LF, articulated, pivot bogies, modular scaling
- huge expectations from the client on
comfort, reliability, maintainability, life period…
- BUT
new constructions – no experience – many disillusions
Tram development
But we need to be honest: In most cases, the trams have been ordered and designed for 50 to 60tkm p.a. but in reality they ran as twice as much.
• Low floor vehicles – first generation
corrosion, tear and wear, reliability, maintenance complexity, obsolescence
Tram development
• Low floor vehicles – first generation
corrosion, tear and wear, reliability, maintenance complexity, obsolescence
Tram development
Die Bestellung umfasste 40 Wagen in zwei Serien (mit einer Option auf 60 weitere Fahrzeuge), von denen die erste 1993 geliefert wurde. Nachdem der erste R-Wagen in Frankfurt eintraf, fand eine Pressefahrt statt, die schon nach wenigen Metern wegen technischer Probleme vorzeitig beendet werden musste. Auch in der Folgezeit machten die Fahrzeuge durch zahllose technische Pannen Schlagzeilen, die aufwändig durch die Hersteller nachgebessert werden mussten. Die durch die erste Serie gesammelten Erfahrungen flossen direkt in den Bau der ebenfalls 20 Wagen umfassenden zweiten Serie ein, die 1997 geliefert wurde. Die Radgeräusche (Rumpeln und Quietschen, vor allem in Kurven) wurden durch den Einbau von Absorbern verringert und die Kurvenschwingungen durch den Einbau von Stabilisatoren stark gedämpft[7]. Durch die Stabilisatoren wurde auch das starke Ausschlagen des angelenkten Wagenteils in die entgegengesetzte Richtung unmittelbar nach der Kurvendurchfahrt weitgehend unterbunden. Die Option auf 60 weitere Fahrzeuge wurde nicht eingelöst, da die Fahrzeuge der ersten beiden Serien trotz zahlreicher Nachbesserungen nicht zufriedenstellend funktionierten. Unter anderem konnte das Problem mit dem Hitzestau, wodurch im Sommer die Hydraulikleitungen der Federungen platzen, nicht behoben werden. Ein weiterer Grund dafür waren die fehlenden Kupplungen, die die Stadtwerke bei der Bestellung vergessen hatten. Siemens baute daraufhin keine weiteren Fahrzeuge des Typs R mehr, sondern konzentrierte sich auf die Konstruktion des Nachfolgetyps Combino. Trotzdem beharrte Siemens auf der Einlösung der Option auf weitere 60 Wagen, nun jedoch in Form von Fahrzeugen des Typs Combino. Es wäre allerdings wegen der Vergaberichtlinien nicht zulässig gewesen, wenn die Stadt andere Wagen gekauft hätte als diejenigen, die seinerzeit die Ausschreibung gewonnen hatten. Dafür musste zunächst eine erneute Ausschreibung erfolgen.
Just one example Article copied from Wikipedia about the R-type tram in Frankfurt describing lots of technical imperfections and the struggle between operator and producer.
• Low floor vehicles – second generation
Dresden NGT8, Norrköping…
Tram development
Quelle:
http://strassenbahn-online.de/Betriebshof/LF050/FLEXITY_Norrkoeping/index.html
Quelle:
VCDB
• Low floor vehicles, second generation
- detailed and realistic expectations from the client on
RAMS, TCO, annual mileage, long-term consequences…
- the key deliverers have learned
advanced constructions – sensitivity on maintenance cost
new products offered (delivery AND service)
- BUT new players are coming up
and are facing some of the problems of the first generation again
Tram development
• Looking at the scheduled / light maintenance
• All three levels are important (what you might have expected), but this
nothing unexpected new.
- ROOF area, lots of components require access
- FLOOR level, in and out are the most frequent ways for the empoyees
- PIT level, brakes, hydraulics and electric need inspeection
• The same goes for the special purpose tracks for washing, lifting and wheel
profiling. They are needed and defined by their function.
Maintenance - back to the title: Experiences after 20 years…
Roof level
pit level floor level
Inside
30%
Roof 30%
Below
30%
Side 10%
Work on 3 levels in Berlin
The best solution might be tricky to find…
… but we strongly recommend NOT to use a LRT or mainline approach for a
tram workshop!
Maintenance - back to the title: Experiences after 20 years…
• Looking at the heavy maintenance / overhaul
Higher complexity than scheduled maintenance
Demanding legal and technical development
Experiences lead to different needs
than planing rules suggest (e.g. VDV823)
THINGS HAVE CHANGED.
Maintenance - back to the title: Experiences after 20 years…
Where have things changed?
These main fields require new approach:
A Perfoming a technical overhaul after (8) or 16 years
A1 For repair and technical overhaul of mid size / bigger fleets
SPECIALISED tracks are useful.
A2 Track distances vary and should be widened up to 8 or 9 m
B Bogies are a key element – and the space needed
for bogie overhaul is always designed too small
Maintenance: Experiences after 20 years…
A1 For repair and technical overhaul of mid size / bigger fleets
SPECIALISED tracks are useful.
WHY?
Different tasks need different technology
We recommend
FIRST following the work process and
SECOND define the equipment needed as well as the optimal layout position
Maintenance: Experiences after 20 years…
Table with typical work process
A2 Track distances vary and should be widened up to 8 or 9 m
VDV-recommendations need upgrade
Mounting, demounting, transport corridors, material, equipment,
stairs for access to roof/pit, HVAC and WORKERS simply need space.
Maintenance: Experiences after 20 years…
B Bogies are a key element – and the space needed
for bogie overhaul is always designed too small
Maintenance: Experiences after 20 years…
and finally – a short story about the history of new Bergen Flesland depot
First ideas from the clients consultant
VCDB optimised this layout together with Bybanen – some key figures - 20% ground use - 20% track length - 5 workbays (12 instead of 17) + 2 m axle with for workbays (8m instead of 6m) same workshop size
and finally – a short story about the history of new Bergen Flesland depot
The tender procedure was won by an Irish consultant company MMD. They suggested another optimisation, driven by investment.
- 7 Workbays (10 instead of 17) + 1 m axle with for workbays (7m instead of 6m) - 350m² for bogie repair (450m² instead of 800m²) - 0.85m for stabling area (3,15m instead of 4m)
VCDB was asked by Bybanen to find a way between minimum investment and sustainable, long-term feasible maintenance. … a long but fruitful discussion process….
Thank you for your attention.
LUNCHTIME!