1 / 28

Various concepts of guided transport systems for periurban applications

This paper discusses various concepts of guided transportation systems, including railway systems, magnetic levitation systems, and guided systems on pneumatic tyres, for periurban areas. It examines different types of systems, their characteristics, and their integration with urban planning.

dalehorn
Download Presentation

Various concepts of guided transport systems for periurban applications

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Various concepts of guided transport systems for periurban applications Claude Soulas, GRETTIA 29 09 2011

  2. THREE IMPORTANT TERMS • GUIDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS : mainly railway systems, but include theoretically magnetic levitation systems and guided systems on pneumatic tyres • CONCEPTS : try to identify common general characteristics independently from particular applications in different agglomerations or regions • Systems for PERIURBAN AREAS : long lines of urban systems, or specific periurban (or suburban) systems, or regional systems.

  3. SYSTEMS FOR PERIURBAN AREAS ROAD SYSTEMS : BUS GUIDED SYSTEMS : RAILBUS(THE PAST) LIGHT RAILCARS(NOW) GUIDED SYSTEMS ON PNEUMATIC TYRES ? (difficult for periurban areas) « CLASSICAL » RAILWAY SYSTEMS INNOVATIVE SYSTEMS C. SOULAS

  4. TWO DIFFERENT DEUFRAKO PROJECTS (French German cooperation) TWO DIFFERENT PERIODS, TWO DIFFERENT APPROACHES • In 1987 STARLIM = development of an innovative suburban system with magnetic levitation, linear motor, automatic drive (150 km/h or more : long distance between stops). • In 2001 BAHN.VILLE = Rail oriented development and intermodality in German and French urban regions. (Bahn.Ville 1 : 2001 - 2005, Bahn.Ville 2 : 2007 - 2010)

  5. TWO TENDENCIES FOR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS • TECHNICAL INNOVATION, WITH MORE OR LESS AMBITIOUS OBJECTIVES. NOWADAYS MORE DEVELOPMENTS FOR PRIVATE CARS THAN FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT : ELECTROMOBILITY, « INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTS », …. . • PRAGMATIC EVOLUTION, ADAPTED TO THE CONTEXT, EXAMPLE OF THE INTERCONNEXION TRAMWAY IN KARLSRUHE

  6. The result of an « old » ambition, to be forgotten Transrapid : magnetic levitation Now periurbain system in Shanghai (link with airport) Electrical active guideway

  7. An other ambition, ten years ago. Difficult (STUDY CARRIED OUT BY FRAUNHOFER INSTITUT IN DRESDEN, in 2001)

  8. URBAN/PERIURBAN/ REGIONAL SYSTEMS TRAMWAY,(55 netwoks in Germany, less in France but some recent relatively long lines) LIGHT RAIL, « Stadtbahn » or « Métro léger » ,(16 netwoks in Germany, no in France according a strict definition but Rouen is a similar concept) LIGHT METRO, eg automatic systems, VAL,… CLASSICAL METRO REGIONAL METRO, « S-Bahn » or « RER » ,(at least 14 netwoks in Germany, at least one huge network in France) VARIOUS RAILWAY SYSTEMS : several concepts Frontiers between systems not always clear. Some overlapping of application fields C. SOULAS

  9. TYPES OF REGIONAL RAILWAY SYSTEMS • INTERCONNEXION TRAM «TRAM-TRAIN », « ZWEI-SYSTEM-FAHRZEUG » • REGIONAL TRAM / « TRAIN-TRAM », this concept can be achieved by different systems, different rolling stocks (eg tram vehicles, sometimes light railcar) • RAILCARS « AUTORAIL »,   »TRIEBWAGEN » • CLASSICAL RAILCARS • « FRENCH-GERMAN » RAILCAR • LIGHT RAILCARS : MANY EXAMPLES IN GERMANY, FOR EXAMPLE « REGIOSPRINTER » (60t LONGITUDINAL STRENGTH) C. SOULAS

  10. COMPLEXITY OF THE CASE OF KARLSRUHE • In Karlsruhe implementation of a new concept • In France invention of the term of « tram-train » or « interconnexion tram » • In Germany no universal term. In the literature many different terms according to the context : « Model of Karsruhe », « Two-systems-vehicle », « Two-systems-light rail », etc, And some ambiguous terms : « bimodal », « hybrid ». In the network of Karlsruhe the system is considered as a regional metro « S-Bahn ». • In Karlsruhe a 500 km network, in addition to the urban tram network, and in addition to regional trains : • two different systems with a majority of real « two-systems-vehicles» • some specific operationnal caharacteristics : eg stops on demand • importance of the intermodality strategies (busses, bike, ;..) • link with urban planing

  11. Interconnexion tramway : technical adaptations in order to circulate on two different networks • adaptation of wheel profiles for two types of rail • electrical supply with two types of current • adaptation of signalization • specific devices for accessibility (gauge 2,65m)

  12. Intermodality between tram-train and bus Station Heilbronn (regional network Karlsruhe)

  13. Intermodality with Regional Metro « S-Bahn » and other guided systems • Example of bicycle parking devices at a station of Francfort S-Bahn. Many best practices in Germany (Munich, Cologne), Holland, Japan, Denmark, … Presentation of the results of PREDIT project PORT-VERT at French Ministry of Transport, October the 5th.

  14. LINKS BETWEEN SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS AND REGIONAL/URBAN PLANING ADEQUATION BETWEEN SYSTEM AND TERRITORY (e.g. distance between stopping points) INSERTION CHARACTERISTICS TYPE OF LEVEL CROSSINGS ACCESSIBILITY FOR VARIOUS USER CATEGORIES SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF SAFETY C. SOULAS

  15. SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE SPEED, ACCELERATION, DECELERATION (TRACTION, MASS, LONGITUDINAL STRENGTH) AESTHETIC PARAMETERSGAUGE, HEIGHT, DESIGN, CATENARY INTEGRATION IMPACT ON ENVIRONMENT EXHAUST EMISSIONS, NOISE C. SOULAS

  16. Source VDV

  17. Source VDV

  18. SYSTEMS COMPARIZONS « MINIMAL CASE » EXAMPLE OF A 40 km TYPICAL LINE WITH 7 INTERMEDIATE STOPS, ACCORDING TO THE LITTERATURE (CERTU PUBLICATION) CLASSICAL FRENCH RAILCARS : between 50mn and 43mn FRENCH-GERMAN RAILCAR : 39mn TWO SYSTEMS VEHICLES : KARLSRUHE 39mn, SAARBRUCKEN 37mn GERMAN LIGHT RAILCARS : 38mn NEW INVESTIGATIONS IN BAHN.VILLE 2 on the line St Etienne Firminy C. SOULAS

  19. R&D PROGRAMS since 2000 (IMPACT ON ENVIRONMENT) SYSTEMS WITH ELECTRIC TRACTION : ENERGY BIMODALITY, EXAMPLE OF THALES PROJECT, WITH SUPERCONDENSATORS« TRAM-TRAIN HYBRIDE A ALIMENTATION ELECTRIQUE PAR SUPERCONDENSATEURS » NO INDUSTRIAL APPLICATION SYSTEMSWITH THERMIC TRACTION (DIESEL OR GAS) : HYBRIDATION BY MEANS OF FLYWHEELS - ULEV-TAP : MODIFICATION OF AN INTERCONNEXION TRAMWAY IN KARLSRUHE - LIREX « LIGHTWEIGHT INNOVATIVE REGIONAL EXPRESS », DIESEL-ELECTRIC RAILCAR, EVOLUTION TOWARDS AN INDUSTRIAL PRODUCT « CORADIA-LIREX » C. SOULAS

  20. NEW IDEAS IN THE FIELD OF URBAN PUBLIC TRANPORT : SIMPLIFIED CHRONOLOGY 1970-1980 : invention of automatic « new transportation modes » with a decreasing complexity : PRT (Personal Rapid Transit), then ARAMIS, then light automated metros such as VAL system 1980-1990 : beginning of tramway reintroduction in some towns 1990-2000 : new concept called «intermediate systems», but in fact three différents types of new guided systems on pneumatic tyres (on ground transportation) 2000-2010 (particularly 2005) : definition of BHNS concept «Bus à Haut Niveau de Service » / BHLS IT IS NECESSARY TO TAKE ALL THE TRANSPORTATION MODES IN CONSIDERATION, ON A LONG PERIOD COMPLEXITY IS MOVING : LESS COMPLEXITY FOR THE SYSTEM OR THE CONCEPT, BUT COMPLEXITY FOR THE INTERFACES, AND SOMETIMES FOR NEW COMPONENTS

  21. AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS : 40 YEARS OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Considered as an universalpotential solution in 1970 and later : itcontributed to delay tramway reintroduction as well as bus netwoksimprovements Main limitation of the diffusion : difficultacceptance of aerialguideway in towns, highcost of tunnels (or cut-off effectatgrounglevel) In the context of European countries itis an adequate solution in some cases : for metros and mini-metros in order to increase system attractivityduring off-peakhours, and for short to middle range sytemswherehighfrequencyisnecessary A LONG TIME FOR MATURATION , eg for VAL sytem : after 40 yearsitappears the NEOVAL system with an optimizedguidingdevice

  22. LE VAL 208 DE RENNES Source Siemens

  23. NEW GUIDED SYSTEMS ON PNEUMATIC TYRES MECHANICAL GUIDANCE Chronology : • lateral kerb-guidance (above rolling plan) O-Bahn Essen, guided busses • central rail, vertical guidance GLT / TVR Nancy, Caen • central rail, oblique « V » guidance Translohr : Clermont, Italy, China,… « IMMATERIAL» GUIDANCE Chronology : • wire guidance old experiments : Fürth, + (Channel tunnel) • optical guidance CIVIS Castellone,… TEOR Rouen • electronic guidance PHILEAS Eindhoven, EVEOLE Douai (trajectory storage and transponders)

  24. Tramway on pneumatic tyres Translohr in Clermont Ferrand (Since october 2006)

  25. Translohr in Padoue (Italy)

  26. Guidance device of Translohr, « in form of V » Deux paires de galets obliques pincent un monorail central Source : Lohr Industrie

  27. BHLS AND TRAM COMPARIZON • Cost comparizon is not the only one criteria and has to be replaced in its context. Eg 30 years ago a demonstration that fully automatic H-Bahn was cheaper than bus system for a network in the town of Erlangen . But hypothesis 1mn frequency. • Compared to other investigations the FGSV cost comparizon (publication 2008) coordinated by V Deutsch (University Wuppertal) has two advantages : - it avoids to compare « apples with peers », by choosing identical conditions - has limited the scope of the comparizon to a reasonable ridership for European context The choice of some parameters remains of course difficult

  28. A PRUDENT INTERPRETATION OF BHLS AND TRAM COMPARIZON Results depend on the context : - in term of total cost during a 30 years period, in some conditions a 24m biarticulated diesel BHLS could be significantly cheaper than tram, eg 30%, but not 2 times cheaper ; • for a 24m biarticulated BHLS trolleybus total costs are comparable to that of tram, if we consider a 5mn interval for trolleybus and 8mn interval for tram. Comparizon relevant only for ridersip not higher than 2 500 pasengers/ h/ direction • Some elements are difficult to monetarize, eg smaller width of tram lanes, better regularity (longer vehicles at traffic lights) • Importance of some questions such as impact of electric supply

More Related