MGMT of Railway Infra

Master CIMO Transport et Mobilit
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF MAINTENANCE OF A

RAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM
STRATAKI Maria
Memoire de stage London Underground

sous la direction de Michel Savy
September 2011
Acknowledgements
First of all, I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor, Professor Michel Savy, for
believing in my capacities and encouraging me throughout the research of a complex
technical issue. I would like to thank him for giving me the opportunity to combine study
and work in two major European cities, Paris and London. Moreover, I would like to thank
him for his stimulating suggestions and his priceless time.
I am also very grateful to my colleagues and my in-house supervisor in Transport for

London, David Dobson, for their support and their enthusiasm concerning my research.
Moreover, I would like to thank David for his attentive reading and prompt suggestions and
contributions on improving my English.
I would also like to express my love to my parents who are always next to me, investing in
my education and help me improve myself every day. Finally, I would like to thank all my
friends who continuously supported. My special thanks to Apostolis who constantly helped
me and shared with me the wonderful experience of this year.
Maria Strataki
September 2011
London, UK
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF A RAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM 2

Rsum
Les reformes des chemins de fer en cours depuis les deux dernires dcennies et les
collectivits publiques exigent un accroissement de la productivit de linfrastructure
ferroviaire qui se traduit en gnral par une pression sur les moyens financiers octroys
ainsi que par des exigences accrues en matire de capacit et de disponibilit de
linfrastructure.
De ces exigences mergent deux sujets. Le premier rside dans lusure des rails. Le
deuxime touche la ncessit dune gestion durable de linfrastructure par le biais dune
stratgie de maintenance de linfrastructure notamment axe sur le long terme.
Il sagit dune problmatique de gestion coordonne du dveloppement de linfrastructure
ferroviaire et les contraintes technico-conomiques lies la capacit de linfrastructure.
Dans ce contexte, le mmoire analyse les liens importants entre les paramtres qui causent
lusure des rails et les lments de planification de la maintenance.
Ce thme est trait en utilisant la base des donnes et les caractristiques gomtriques de
la ligne Bakerloo du mtro londonien.
Ces rflexions dbouchent sur la cration de modles statistiques qui proposent quelques
pistes de dveloppement qui pourraient terme constituer un support utile aux
gestionnaires dinfrastructure.
Abstract
The commercialisation and deregulation of railway industry has led to a raised level of
competitiveness, therefore higher productivity, more efficiency and lower prices overall.
Thus, track requirements in terms of axle load, gross tonnage, speed, etc. are increased,
resulting in more failures on the track and in requirements for more maintenance.
Due to this pressure, two problems occur. The first is the track wear and the second one is
the need for a sustainable management of the infrastructure in order to have a safe and
reliable network with sufficient capacity and availability.
The research problem lies in the coordinated management of the development of the
railway infrastructure and the technical and economic constraints connected to the
infrastructure.
A simulation of Bakerloo line is included in order to identify the participation of technical
factors in railway degradation. Additionally, the necessity of developing a cost model has
risen in order to better predict and manage the cost of maintenance.
The considerations lead to the creation of statistical models proposing some possible
development strategies which might by time support the infrastructure manager.

Mots cls
Planification ferroviaire, planification de la maintenance dun rseau ferre, stratgies de
maintenance, gestion coordonne de la maintenance, facteurs de dgradation, cout du
cycle de vie de linfrastructure, simulation de lexploitation, voie ferre.
Keywords
Railways planning, railways maintenance and renewal planning, strategic maintenance
planning, coordinated management of rail network maintenance, degradation factors,
infrastructure life cycle cost (LCC), simulation of the operation, railway track.

FIGURES
Figure 1.1: EU27 - Performance by mode in freight transport 1995-2007

Figure 1.1: Flow chart of analysis track condition data
Figure 3.1: Representation of an open system
Figure 3.2: The environment of a system: the environment of a company
Figure 3.3: Representation of a mobility system
Figure 3.4: The operating system of railway infrastructure
Figure 3.5: The three tools of systemic approach
Figure 3.6: Factors affecting railway RAMS
Fig. 3.7: Influence of preventive maintenance to the Life Cycle of the system
Fig. 3.8: The activities of corrective maintenance
Figure 4.1: Three basic parameters of rail infrastructure influencing railway performance
Figure 4.2: Map of the Bakerloo line
Figure 4.3: Vehicle on a curve and Rolling Radius difference
Figure 4.4: Relation between Tg and track curvature
Figure 4.5: Rail wear on sharp curves
Figure 4.6: Track life by curvature estimated
Figure 4.7: Cant deficiency and lateral acceleration
Figure 4.8: Difference between flat-bottom and bullhead rail
Figure 4.9: Speed profile of Bakerloo line
Figure 4.10: Central vertical wear h and side wear s
Figure 4.11: Measurement of rail wear
Figure 4.12: Sample train formations of 1972 Tube Stock showing how the four car unit could have a
3-car unit coupled at either end, either way round
Figure 4.13: Bogie design for track friendly vehicles
Figure 4.14: Schematic survey of maintenance and renewal process
Figure 5.1: Factors influencing the performance of track infrastructure
Figure 5.2: Life Cycle Cost of a railway system
Figure 5.3:Utilising wheel-rail interface model wear rate output to predict average lifespan and
annual track maintenance cost
Figure 5.4: Predicting lifespan for point ends
Figure 5.5: Existing Lifespan
Figure 5.6: Curve fitting based on Annual Energy Lost
Figure 5.7: Lifespan Curve according to Annual Tonnage and Track Curvature
Figure 6.1: Maintenance planning overview
Figure 6.2: Track Maintenance Optimisation Parameters
Figure 6.3: Analysis of an Optimisation model in Railway industry

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1
1.1European Policy Framework .......................................................................................................... 2
1.2 Research Problem ......................................................................................................................... 4
1.3 Objectives of research .................................................................................................................. 5
1.4 Research Questions ...................................................................................................................... 5
1.5 Scope and Delimitations ............................................................................................................... 5
1.6 Structure of the Thesis .................................................................................................................. 6
2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................... 8
2.1 Research purpose ................................................................................................................... 8
2.2 Research Approach ................................................................................................................. 8
2.3 Data Collection ........................................................................................................................ 9
2.4 Data Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 10
2.5 Reliability and Validity........................................................................................................... 10
3. STRATEGIC PLANNING OF A RAILWAY SYSTEM .................................................................... 11
3.1 Presentation of a system ...................................................................................................... 11
3.1.1 Systems environment .......................................................................................................... 12
3.2 Representation of a railway infrastructure system .................................................................... 13
3.2.1 The presentation of a mobility system ................................................................................. 13
3.2.2 The presentation of railway infrastructure system .............................................................. 14
3.3 Tactical and strategic planning of a system ................................................................................ 16
3.4 Performance measures related to the operation of a system.................................................... 17
3.4.1 RAMS Analysis for Railway Track ......................................................................................... 17
3.4.2 Factors Affecting RAMS........................................................................................................ 18
3.4.3 Maintaining performance and system conditions ............................................................... 20
3.4.4 Life Cycle Analysis................................................................................................................. 22
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 22
4. WEAR MODEL DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................ 23

4.1 Simulation procedure ................................................................................................................. 25
4.1.1 Modelling the Bakerloo line ................................................................................................. 25
4.2 Rail Wear ..................................................................................................................................... 26
4.3 Technical degradation factors causing rail wear ........................................................................ 27
4.3.1 The effect of track quality (geometric characteristics) ........................................................ 27
4.3.1.1Rail wear on sharp curves .................................................................................................. 28
4.3.1.2 Rail wear on high rails ....................................................................................................... 29
4.3.1.3 Flat bottom or Bull head rail cross sections ...................................................................... 30
4.3.2 The effect of train services ................................................................................................... 31
4.3.2.1 Train speed ........................................................................................................................ 31
4.3.2.2 Utilisation of network ....................................................................................................... 32
4.3.3 The effect of Vehicle Characteristics .................................................................................... 33
4.4 Maintenance and renewal activities ........................................................................................... 36
4.4.1 Inspection of Rail Wear ........................................................................................................ 37
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 37
5.DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTEGRATED MODEL FOR ESTIMATION OF EXPECTED MAINTENANCE

COST ......................................................................................................................................... 39
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 39
5.1 Life Cycle Cost (LCC) theory ........................................................................................................ 40
5.1.1 LCC in Railways: the Zoeteman model ................................................................................. 41
3.2 5.2 Main obstacles to LCC implementation on Railways ...................................................... 42
5.3 Approach to Track Maintenance Cost Model in Bakerloo line ................................................... 43
5.4 Cost Modelling in London Underground..................................................................................... 44
5.4.1 Track Maintenance Cost - Track Lifespan ............................................................................ 45
5.4.2 Track Maintenance Point Ends Lifespan ........................................................................... 47
5.5 Cost Estimation in Maintenance Phase ...................................................................................... 50
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 51
6. TRACK MAINTENANCE PLANNING........................................................................................... 52

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 52
6.1 Evaluation of maintenance needs State of the art .................................................................. 53
6.1.1 Framework for analysing the short terms needs ................................................................. 53
6.1.2 Framework for analyzing the long term performance ......................................................... 54
6.2 Maintenance Optimisation ......................................................................................................... 55
6.2.1 Applicability to rail track maintenance ................................................................................ 55
6.3 Strategic axes in maintenance optimisation ............................................................................... 57
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 59
7.2 Research contribution .......................................................................................................... 60
7.3 Scope for further research .......................................................................................................... 61
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 61
REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 63
APPENDIX 1 ............................................................................................................................... 66

1.INTRODUCTION
1.INTRODUCTION
A short introduction to the research problem is illustrated in this chapter. It covers the
problem areas of the research study and discusses the research questions and the scope of
the dissertation.
Railway transportation system is one of the most commonly used mode of transports and its
importance and utility is very high for the society. With advancement of the technology,
changing environment and increasing customers demands, railways have to constantly
upgrade their various operational activities in order to revitalize the European railway
landscape so that the rail becomes a competitive alternative to road and, to some extent,
air. A safe and reliable network with sufficient capacity and availability is of prime
requirement. In this, the railway infrastructure plays an important role. Railway track forms
an essential part of the railway infrastructure, which consists of components like; rail,
sleeper, fasteners, switches and crossings, ballast, sub-grade. Each of these components has
a different life and degradation rate.
Each of the track components with its varying life and degrading conditions will influence
the quality and operability of the track. In order to maintain the quality of infrastructure at
an accepted level, two aspects of track quality need to be considered, i.e. measurement of
track quality on a continuous basis and means to achieve required track quality
(maintenance planning) before the quality falls below accepted level. Track quality is
measured by various parameters, e.g. service reliability, track utilisation and accessibility,
track safety, track system and cost-effectiveness. High operation and maintenance costs act
as a barrier for achieving financial performance of railway operation.
The commercialisation and deregulation of London Transport has led to a raised level of
competitiveness, therefore higher productivity, more efficiency and lower prices overall.
Thus, track requirements in terms of axle load, gross tonnage, speed, etc. are increased,
resulting in more failures on the track and in requirements for more maintenance. At the
same time, availability of track to perform necessary maintenance decreases, due to the
increased traffic. This requires more budget and better maintenance planning.
In order to optimize the policy and financial flows concerning operation and maintenance
costs, infrastructure managers are compelled to optimise budget, while reliability and
availability have to be increased without endangering the traffic safety. A systematic
approach is needed for communication with the infrastructure manager for guaranteeing
defined levels of performance. Most of the maintenance and renewal decisions are based
both on simulation results and empirical data trying to calibrate the relationship between

1.INTRODUCTION
the theoretical approach and the real situation. A life cycle costing approach in combination
with RAMS (Reliability Availability, Maintainability and Safety) analysis will provide a way to
optimise the maintenance strategy.
1.1European Policy Framework

The transport system needs to be optimized to meet the demands of enlargement and
sustainable development. A modern transport system must be sustainable from an
economic and social as well as an environmental viewpoint. As far as the European railways
are concerned, they have walked a long path of standardisation and knowledge sharing in
order to enhance the current railway position in the European transport system. Moreover,
to become more competitive than road transport, interoperability between national
systems must be achieved, improving the coherent and safe movement of trains across
Europe, while reducing delays at border (due to different rolling stock) and extra costs
associated.
The 2001 White Paper (EC, 2001) emphasized the importance of safeguarding efficient
mobility for people and goods as the central element of a competitive EU internal market.
This key document of the EUs strategy on transport policy proposed a list of measures to
break the link between economic and traffic growth, to promote modal shift and combat
the unequal growth of the various modes of transport. In fact, the document sees rail
transport as the key to achieve modal rebalance, intermodal integration and mitigate the
dependency on road transport, particularly in the case of passengers. In the case of freight
transport, between 1990 and 1998, road haulage increased by 19.4 % while during the same
period, rail haulage decreased by 43.5 %, compared to the 40% market share that rail
haulage still represents in the USA, reveals that there is still in Europe great potential in
railway transport to explore.The growth of the other modes of transport, and especially
road expansion, is partly due to the fact that the external costs of transport are not
internalized, and only rail is affected by the increased costs associated with the EU
Emissions Trading System through its large-scale use of electricity. As the table below shows
however, railways represent a small percentage in the freight transport.

1.INTRODUCTION
Fig.1.1: EU27 - Performance by mode in freight transport 1995-2007 (Source: EU Energy and
Transport in figures 1995-2007, European Comission)
Nevertheless, interoperability between national railways and other modes of transport

seems to be more important even than segregated traffic. For example, one major obstacle
to effective operation usually discussed is the difference of gauge between the Iberian
infrastructure (1,668 m) and the international one (1,435 m).
In addition to interoperability and increasing competitiveness of intermodal transport, other

measures such as creating a genuine market in rail transport, making optimum use of
infrastructure while guaranteeing rail safety standards and assuring the necessary
modernisation of services, are also important strategic goals. More consciousness of the
importance of sustainability in the European transport policy is also evident, as energy and
environmental aspects of the transport policy became crucial for the challenge of climate
change. In fact, according to the last European Environment Agency report (2008), transport
accounts for 21% (878Mt CO2 equivalent) of all EU-15 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Road transport contributes with the biggest share, accounting for 19% of all EU-15 GHG

1.INTRODUCTION
emissions, while Railways only represent 0.7% of the total GHG emissions (6 Mt CO2
equivalent). Although the focus to face this challenge is the road transport, through
technological improvements in vehicle and fuels (increasing energy efficiency), or even new
methods of charging and taxation (internalisation of external costs of transport), the
revitalisation of railways is still seen as an essential element to create an efficient and
environmentally sound transport system.
(IUC, International Union of Railways, CER, Community of European Railway and
Infrastructure Companies (2008), Rail Transport and Environment: Facts and Figures
EC, European Communities (2001). WHITE PAPER, European transport policy for 2010: time
to decide. ISBN: 92-894-0341-1.)
1.2 Research Problem

Infrastructure managers are facing increasing demands from traffic operators as well as
passengers to ensure a safe, reliable and comfortable railway service. To achieve these
objectives, the quality of the track infrastructure needs to be improved and maintained.
Maintenance activities of the track have certain maintenance goals which are linked to the
organisational goals and objectives help in achieving the overall objectives of the track.
Usually, the overall maintenance strategy consists of various critical success factors that are
necessary to achieve the overall goals for maintenance. The critical success factors include
the guidelines of the functions (reliability, safety, and comfort) to be achieved, methods for
establishing and measuring the relationship between operational reliability, condition of
infrastructure and maintenance work carried out, methods for measuring cost-effectiveness
of maintenance operations, etc.
In this context, the dissertation distinguishes the radical relationship between principal
elements of maintenance planning and the technical and economical constraints connected
to the track lifespan.
The problem arises of how to achieve track maintenance goals from the track conditions
data. Effective measurement of the condition of the track, which includes track degradation
and track failures, as well as maintenance actions on the track, is necessary for the
achievement of track maintenance goals. Figure 1.2 describes an approach to achieve track
maintenance goals by analysing track condition data.

1.INTRODUCTION
Fig.1.2: Flow chart of analysis track condition data (Source: Iwnicki S. et al, 2004)
1.3 Objectives of research

The purpose of the study is to explore and describe the relation and interdependence
between the track maintenance planning strategy and the economical and technical aspects
of railway infrastructure system.
1.4 Research Questions

In order to analyse this relation the following questions arise:
How can we relate damage to:
Line characteristics (curvature, cant, other)?
Train services (journeys, load, and speed)?
Train design (steering, suspension, mass, number of bogies)? (Chapter 4)
How do track maintenance costs relate to defects? (Chapter 5)
Which strategy is followed for the track maintenance planning? (Chapter 6)
1.5 Scope and Delimitations

London Underground Ltd (LU) is exploring technological options for the track maintenance
strategy, initially to operate on the Bakerloo line as it presents some irregularities (very
curvy and old rolling stock). In order to minimize the cost of track maintenance, it runs out a
research involving the production of a methodology to quantify the performance of vehicles
and the role of line characteristics with respect to propensity to generate rail damage/wear.

1.INTRODUCTION
Thus, LU tries to identify the importance of technical characteristics to rail wear, which
increases track maintenance costs, and find the appropriate economic tools to better
organize its maintenance strategy.
1.6 Structure of the Thesis

The thesis consists of seven chapters and it is organised in the following way:
Chapter 1:
It presents an introduction and background to the research and the European Policy on the
issue of this research. The chapter also outlines the purpose of study, objectives, research
questions and delimitations.
Chapter 2:
It depicts the different phases of research, which includes the research purpose, research
approach, data collection, data analysis and evaluation of research reliability and validity.
Chapter 3:
It describes the strategic planning of a railway system. It discusses the management of
complex systems, like the railway system and presents the systemic approach which can
lead to an effective strategic planning. Finally, the role of the RAMS (Reliability, Availability,
Maintainability, and Safety) analysis is depicted as well as the factors affecting RAMS.
Chapter 4:
It is based on the modelling and the analysis of rail wear. Firstly, it describes the degradation
and maintenance of railway structure and secondly, it contains a simulation of Bakerloo
metro line discussing in particular the participation of technical factors in railway
degradation (line characteristics, train services and vehicle characteristics).Finally, the
importance of inspection in the maintenance process is outlined.
Chapter 5:
It presents the need of LCC for railway infrastructure, the main obstacles to the LCC
implementation on railway and finally a process for life cycle costing estimation in London
Underground is illustrated.
Chapter 6:
It describes the principles of Track Maintenance Planning and the required framework for
analysing short-term and long-term needs, in the context of maintenance optimisation.

1.INTRODUCTION
Chapter 7:
It presents the results of the research that was conducted and paves the way for the
development and the optimisation of the maintenance management in order to cope with
the increased demands from transport operators and the government.

2.RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In this chapter some research options and methods are described briefly. The chosen
research approach and methodologies for achieving the research objectives have been
discussed.
Research is a process through which questions are asked and answered systematically. As a
form of criticism, research can include the questions of whether or not we are asking the
right questions (Dane, 1990). Research methodology is the link between thinking and
evidence (Sumser, 2000). This provides a framework for integration of the different
technical, commercial, and managerial aspects of study. The study of research
methodologies provides the researcher with the knowledge and skills that are needed to
solve the problems and meet the challenges of a fast-paced decision making environment
(Cooper and Schindler, 2003).
2.1 Research purpose

The purpose of research can be classified basically into four ways i.e. exploratory (explore a
new topic), descriptive (describe a phenomenon), explanatory (explain why something
occurs) and empirical (use a collection of data to base a theory or derive a conclusion).
The methodologies used in this research are descriptive, exploratory and empirical. The
research purpose of this study is developing in two axes. The first constitutes to examine the
vehicle and track parameters and aggregate their effect on rail wear. The second focuses on
the long-term maintenance needs and the economical tools with regard to the choice of the
best strategy.
2.2 Research Approach
This dissertation is an applied research, the purpose of which is to develop a process to take
track maintenance decisions. The knowledge gathered from extensive literature study and
track standards, discussions and consultations with track engineering experts and rolling
stock managers within London Underground was applied in order to identify the parameters
which affect the most track wear and to clarify the reasons of track damage and facilitate
the procedure to a more cost effective track maintenance management.
The research approach can be categorised into induction or deduction (Sullivan, 2001).
Induction approach uses observations, knowledge base and empirical data to explain and
develop theories. The approach involves inferring something about a whole group or class
of objects from our knowledge of one or a few members of the group or class.

Deduction approach can be applied to show that a conclusion necessarily follows from a
set of premises or hypotheses.
The research approach can be quantitative or qualitative. In simple terms, quantitative
research uses numbers, counts, and measures of things whereas qualitative research adopts
questioning and verbal analysis (Sullivan, 2001). In this research mostly the induction
research approach has been applied. Deduction approach is applied to develop the proper
models for the analysis of railway track maintenance and induction is applied to provide a
general model concerning the causes of rail wear.
Both qualitative and quantitative data have been used in this research. Quantitative
research deals with calculation of rail degradation due to technical factors (e.g. line
characteristics) and qualitative analysis deals with the LCC process in railway track
maintenance.
The systemic approach was also used in order to explain the necessity for the tactical and
strategic planning (Chapter 3).
Moreover, the curve fitting tool, which is the process of constructing a curve, or
mathematical function, that has the best fit to a series of data points, was used in order to
create a model to estimate the track maintenance cost (Chapter 5).
2.3Data Collection
Data can be defined as the facts presented to the researchers from the studied
environment. Data may be divided into primary and secondary types. Data collected by the
researcher for the purpose of study through various experiments or onsite data recording
are called primary data (in situ). Primary data are sought for their proximity to the truth and
control over error. Data collected by other people/organisations and used by the
researchers are called secondary data.
Qualitative data were collected through relevant scientific papers and articles from online
databases, from the library of London Underground and from scientific reports which was
realised on behalf of London Underground. Furthermore, a rigorous research on British
Standards and regulations was conducted.
Quantitative data were collected from database of London Underground and also from the
Ellipse system which is an asset database used to store all Power Delivery maintenance
and asset condition information and WebGIS which is an interactive map-based interface to
access asset information, which is from the GIS suite of software. WebGIS uses
spreadsheets and databases to present data in a variety of views, allowing complex maps to
be created via data driven methods with minimal user interaction. Finally, RES (Railway
Engineering Simulator), software developed by London Underground, was used in order to
model the Bakerloo line. Cost related data were collected from personal consultations with
experts London Underground and from personal calculations based on reports on track
damage prediction.
2.4 Data Analysis

Researchers generate information by analysing data after their collection. Data analysis is an
important step in the research process. Data analysis usually involves the reduction of
accumulated data to a manageable size, developing summaries, looking for patterns, and
applying statistical techniques. Further, the researcher must interpret these findings in the
light of the clients research questions or determine if the results are consistent with the
hypotheses and theories (Cooper and Schindler, 2006).
2.5 Reliability and Validity

According to Neuman (2003) reliability means dependability or consistency. It suggests that
the same things are repeated or reoccur under identical or very similar conditions.
Reliability means that the implementation of a study, such as data collection procedures,
can be conducted by somebody else with the same result. Validity is concerned with
whether or not the item actually elicits the intended information. Validity suggests
fruitfulness and refers to the match between a construct, or the way a researcher
conceptualises the idea in a conceptual definition, and a measure. It refers to how well an
idea about reality fits in with actual reality (Neuman, 2003).
To meet the reliability the data and information used in this dissertation are collected either
from scientific papers, refereed conference proceedings and reports or from London
Underground databases based on rail standards. The tools i.e. Excel and Railway Engineering
Simulator (RES) that are used for data analysis are standard methodologies which have been
used effectively for years and from different companies.

3.STRATEGIC PLANNING OF A RAILWAY SYSTEM
This chapter introduces the necessary theoretical background for the understanding of
planning a railway network in the context of research. The first part raises some basic
notions of systemic presentation of the railway infrastructure and its management. The next
section covers the management of systems evolution, in particular showing an overview of
methods and tools which can be used to measure and analyze the evolution of a system,
such as the concept of RAMS and the cost analysis life cycle. The chapter ends with an
attempt to formalize planning for rail infrastructure.
Introduction
The efficient management of railway infrastructure requires the implementation of many

iterative, sequential or simultaneous processes. Rail infrastructure is a large and complex
system.
3.1 Presentation of a system

An open system is a distinct entity that takes in resources from its environment, processes
them in some way, and produces output. To survive, such a system depends on its
environment, and on interactions between its component parts or subsystems. When taking
an open-systems approach, we look both inward and outward. We are interested in
relationships and patterns of interaction between subsystems and their environments
within the organization. We also look for relationships and reciprocal influences between
the organization and the environment outside its formal "boundary."

Fig. 3.1: Representation of an open system (Source: Field Guide to Consulting and Organizational
Development)
It refers to an operating system transforming the flows that it receives from its environment
(inputs) into products (outputs). It can store them temporarily with the
material, information, money, etc. in order to ensure stable operation. The system
is controlled from outside and provides a stream of indicators concerning its state (technical
condition, age, substance, etc.).
3.1.1 Systems environment
Every open system (natural systems, technical systems) interacts strongly with its own
environment. Thus there is a variety of possible environmental typologies. According to
Thommen (1991) the environment of a railway system is very similar to a companys
environment actors.

Fig. 3.2: The environment of a system: the environment of a company (Source: Putallaz, 2007)
The railway systems environment correlates with a large number of different actors which
have their own particular demands and expectations. Six groups of actors can be defined:
The employees and their associations
The clients and the consumers
The sponsors
The suppliers
The competitors
The role of the State
The particular demands and expectations of the interacting groups refer to multiple sectors:
The economical sector which expresses the interdependence of the company with the
various economical factors
The technological sector which includes the technology and its evolution
The ecological sector
The social sector which refers to the interaction with the society
3.2 Representation of a railway infrastructure system
The railway infrastructure system constitutes a sub-system of the transportation system in a

territory.
3.2.1 The presentation of a mobility system
A mobility system is a set of civil transport systems, whose existence and

operation can provide mobility services to people and goods. It
consists of stationary components, infrastructure and moving parts; the vehicles. A

transport system is characterized by its mode, air, road, rail, sea or soft mode (e.g. bike).
It works by using resources (e.g. personnel, energy) on the basis of an organization (rules).
Fig. 3.3: Representation of a mobility system (Source: Putallaz,2007)
The whole transport system of a territory represents somehow the

mobility planning system of the territory and interacts with the transport demand in that
territory. This interaction depends on several socio-economic factors, external to the
transportation system and its infrastructure.
3.2.2 The presentation of railway infrastructure system
The system consists of operating subsystems which are called

"domains" of infrastructure, as well as two driving systems. The first controls the structure
of network and its infrastructure, while the second controls the operation of the system.
(Putallaz 2007).
These subsystems include:

the vehicle;
the wheel and rail interface; and
and the track structure

The following diagram illustrates the composition of the operating system and the technical
relations linking each domain.
Fig. 3.4: The operating system of railway infrastructure (Source: Putallaz,2007)
The works of infrastructure, which include earthworks (platform track), bridges, tunnels,
retaining walls, etc, represent the route and the gradient of the railway and reinforce the
railway switches and crossings, the signaling and telecommunication equipment.
The track guides the conical, flanged wheels, keeping the cars on the track without active
steering and therefore allowing trains to be much longer than road vehicles. The rails and
ties are usually placed on a foundation made of compressed earth on top of which is placed
a bed of ballast to distribute the load from the ties and to prevent the track from buckling as
the ground settles over time under the weight of the vehicles passing above. The ballast also
serves as a means of drainage. Some more modern track in special areas is attached by
direct fixation without ballast.
Switch and turnouts, also known as points and switches, are used primarily for supporting
and guiding the material stock. The switch rails may be moved left or right, under the
control of the signaling system, to determine which path the train will follow.
The electrification system provides electrical energy to the trains, so they can operate without
a prime mover onboard. Mainline and tram systems normally have overhead wires, which
hang from poles along the line. Grade-separated rapid transit sometimes uses a ground
third rail. Rails allow closing the electrical circuit.
Railway signaling system is used to control railway traffic safely to prevent trains from
colliding. Being guided by fixed rails with low friction, trains are uniquely susceptible to
collision since they frequently operate at speeds that do not enable them to stop quickly or
within the driver's sighting distance.
The telecommunications system is used to transmit information, voice or

technique, between traffic management centers, vehicles and the signaling system.
3.3 Tactical and strategic planning of a system

The systemic approach (Donnadieu et. al, 2003) states three parameters which characterize
a system: its function, its structure and its history. The coordination of these three
parameters can lead to the tactical and strategic planning of a railway system. It represents
the process of understanding how things influence one another within a whole and it
focuses on cyclical rather than linear cause and effect.
Fig.3.5: The three tools of systemic approach (Source: Donnadieu et. al, 2003
As stated before, system is a dynamic and complex whole, interacting as a structured

functional unit. Consequently, the expertise of a system consists of the proficient
coordination between its structure and its function. Actually, the viability and the
sustainability of a system can be assured only if its scope adapts to the demands of its

external environment; in the case of railway infrastructure, to the demands of its socio-
economical environment. Furthermore, according to the systemic approach, the evolving
nature (its history) plays a crucial role in a complex system such as a railway system because
the life cycle of its components varies between 15 and 50 years.
It is, therefore, necessary to develop mechanisms capable of defining the goals and scopes
as well as the structure and the function of the system so as it can improve its performance.
These mechanisms constitute part of the planning procedure.
Two levels of planning can be distinguished:
The strategic planning which defines the desired goal of the system
The tactical planning which tries to organize and optimize the application of the strategic
planning
The distinction between strategic and tactical planning is not very clear and it depends on
the properties of the system as well as on the visions of the infrastructure managers.
3.4 Performance measures related to the operation of a system

The different levels of planning require, as was seen above, the knowledge of
representing various key indicators of how the system operates. These indicators concern
not only the structure and the purpose of the system but also the evolution of the system.
Since the beginning of the industrial age, engineers have strived to create reliable and
durable equipments and systems trying to improve its structure and its evolution. In that
time, developments made in the design process occurred mainly due to a trial and error
process. Despite all the improvements made since then, it is still impossible to expect any
human activity to be flawless and thus failure and risk free. As the cost and risk associated
to failures grew larger due to the increase in the complexity of equipments or systems and
the shortening of their delivery deadlines, it became more and more important to assess
failure and risk and try to make predictions on these as early as in the design step. A need
arose to systematically study how solid would the behaviour of a new system, equipment or
design improvement can be, and that was the beginning of what is today called RAMS.
3.4.1 RAMS Analysis for Railway Track
Reliability, Availability, Maintainability & Safety (RAMS) is defined as characteristic of a

system and acts as a performance indicator for system quality and performance. RAMS is
usually looked at as a set of activities that encompass different fields, which are ultimately
linked to the study of the failure, maintenance and availability of systems .

The first European standard (EN 50126) for the railway system in this context was published
in 1999 by CENELEC which defines Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety (RAMS)
as a characteristic of a systems long term operation and achieved by the application of
established engineering concepts, methods, tools and techniques throughout the lifecycle of
the system.
EN 50126 (1999) defines basic RAMS elements as:

Reliability: probability that an item can perform a required function under given conditions
for a given time interval.
Availability: ability of a product to be in a state to perform a required function under given

conditions at a given instant of time or over a given time interval assuming that the required
external resources are provided.
Maintainability: probability that a given active maintenance action, for an item under given
conditions of use can be carried out within a stated time interval when the maintenance is
performed under stated conditions and using stated procedures and resources.
Safety: the state of technical system freedom from unacceptable risk of harm.
RAMS operation level demands systematic management, in order to improve the quality
and transparency of decision-making, but also to increase rail quality in terms of service. In
fact, RAMS management lacks a life-cycle cost perspective, so that decisions on
maintenance and renewal of infra components consider long run costs.
3.4.2 Factors Affecting RAMS
To achieve a dependable system, factors which could influence the RAMS of the system
need to be identified, their effect needs to be assessed and the causes of these effects need
to be managed throughout the lifecycle of the system.
RAMS of a railway system is influenced in three ways:

System conditions: sources of failures introduced internally within the system at any phase
of system lifecycle.
Operating conditions: sources of failures connected due to system operations.
Maintenance conditions: sources of failures introduced during maintenance actions.
The system condition mostly deals with the design and manufacturing of the track
components whereas the operating condition deals with the rolling stock operations. In
most of the cases it is difficult to change the system conditions.
The operating conditions concern either generic or physical factors and can change (e.g.
change in axle load) because of change in railway regulations. Generic factors affect the
characteristics of RAMS. Similarly, the quality of RAMS data affects the correctness of RAMS
estimation. Many types of data are relevant to the estimation and prediction of reliability,
availability, and maintainability. The factors looked into user skills and capabilities, locations,
etc apart from data type, format and detail level.
Different physical parameters affect track RAMS. In order to assess the effect of these
parameters on the track RAMS, it is important to know the technical characteristics of these
parameters. For example in order to estimate the effect of track load on the RAMS
characteristics of the track, one must know the bending stress, shear stress and the contact
stress imparted by the track load on the track.
Finally, changes in maintenance conditions are quite possible to enhance RAMS of the track
system. An illustration of maintenance conditions affecting track reliability is given below
(Fig.3.6).
Fig.3.6: Factors affecting railway RAMS (Source: EN50126,1999)

3.4.3 Maintaining performance and system conditions
An operating system works by using its technical resources. Inevitably,

the system components wear out under the effect of time and stress. Therefore, the
optimization of the functional performance of the system depends on the optimization of
aging components.
The wear and aging of components require maintenance actions aimed at

prevent or correct the failures of wear or completely replace the components which are too
old. There are three types of maintenance (Hudson W.R. et.al,
1997):
The preventive or proactive maintenance, including tests, measurements, adjustments,

and parts replacement, is designed to prevent the occurrence of failures.
Fig. 3.7: Influence of preventive maintenance to the Life Cycle of the system (AFNOR,2001)
The corrective or retroactive maintenance which intends to correct deficiencies that have
already arisen.

Fig. 3.8: The activities of corrective maintenance (Source: AFNOR,2001)
The replacement maintenance which is designed to partially or totally replace a

component of the system whose repair is impossible or economically inexpedient.
The frequency of maintenance operations may be based on a calendar, then it is called

systematic maintenance (routine maintenance), or monitoring the condition of components,
which is called condition maintenance.
The maintenance planning of a railway network needs the combination of these two types
of maintenance. In general, we call regeneration or renewal interventions the actions of
maintenance which involves replacement and maintenance intervention all the other types
of maintenance.
We have to point out that the decisions concerning track maintenance track should not be
made without considering the operational characteristics of the rolling stock. As stated in EN
50126 (1999), operational availability of the track hardly considers the train schedule. In
order to have a realistic measure of the availability of the track, it is necessary to consider
demand availability in operational availability. Demand availability is the probability that a
system will be in a functioning state on demand (Kumar and Akersten, 2007). In case of
track, demand availability defines that a unit length of track is available when the trains pass
over it. To achieve the demand availability of the track section following measures must be
considered:
Reduce the corrective maintenance on the track. As failures on track can occur at random,
the lower the number of failures the better is the demand availability.
All the preventive maintenance and renewal actions on the track must be carried out in
the train free periods. Maintenance plans on the track need to utilise the train free periods
to maximum for all the maintenance actions.
In order to calculate the demand availability of a track section over a period of reliability and
maintainability of the track along with the time train time table need to be considered.

3.4.4 Life Cycle Analysis
The evolution management of a system, as it is stated by the systemic approach method,

implies the idea of life cycle analysis. Literally, the purpose of the tactical and strategic
planning of a system consists of predicting the future impact of the potential decisions in
order to choose the optimal one. A more detailed analysis of this tool will be realised in the
Chapter 5.
Conclusion
This chapter introduces some theoretical considerations which are useful in order to
understand the research problem and the suggestion s made in the dissertation as well.
The chapter has formalized:
the issue of a mobility system and the methods used in order to measure the evolution of
a system
the railway system and its management
some knowledge of infrastructure planning.
It highlights the process of planning the operation and the maintenance of a railway
network and the importance of coordination aspects between maintenance and
operational management.

4.WEAR MODEL DEVELOPMENT
4. WEAR MODEL DEVELOPMENT
This chapter concerns the wear model development through the use of Railway Engineering
Simulator. It begins with a brief description of degradation and maintenance of railway
structure, afterwards a simulation of Bakerloo metro line is included, as an example,
discussing in particular the participation of technical factors in railway degradation. It refers
to the importance of track quality (geometric characteristics), train services (speed, load and
frequency) and vehicle characteristics (bogie design). Moreover, Maintenance and Renewal
activities are identified, highlighting the importance of inspection in Maintenance.
Introduction
As we move into a period when vertically integrated railways give way to separate track
companies with several train operators competing with each other and using common fixed
infrastructure, the demands on the track provider will increase significantly. Track design
standards, safety strategies, renewal and maintenance technology, staff productivity, cost
management systems, and cost and quality of materials used are all areas which will come
under close scrutiny, as train operators and shareholders demand benchmarking of key
performance indicators.
According to Putallaz (2003) three parameters (see Fig. 4.1) influence the performance of
the track infrastructure. The capacity may be expressed in usable train paths during a
certain time span. The substance of the infrastructure refers to the average remaining
useful life time of its components. Finally, the quality of the infrastructure represents the
tracks geometry quality and components quality. Managing the infrastructure comes down
to setting those three parameters at their most appropriate level, in order to maximize
efficiency. Adjustments may be made to capacity through investment policy, infrastructure
substance through renewal policy and quality through maintenance policy. These three
parameters cannot be adjusted independently. An old infrastructure (low substance)
requires more maintenance (to increase quality) whereas a bad geometry (low quality)
increases the wear on the infrastructure (lower substance). Similarly, more engineering
works (maintenance & renewal) require more track possessions (less capacity) whereas
more traffic (high capacity) induces more wear to the infrastructure.

Fig 4.1: Three basic parameters of rail infrastructure influencing railway performance
(Source: Putallaz, 2003)
The last decades, there is a world-wide trend towards increased pressures on rail track
infrastructure through increases in axle loads and train speeds. Track is therefore subject to
a wide range of bearing and bending stresses in the rails, pads, fasteners, sleepers, ballast
and subgrade. These stresses come about not only because of the static mass of a vehicle,
its wheelsets and the cargo (freight or passenger), but also due to dynamic actions such as
lateral centrifugal forces on curves, longitudinal acceleration and braking forces, rocking of
the vehicle about 3 axes (roll, pitch and yaw), vertical inertial forces from the motion of the
wheelset and its suspension, vibrational forces induced from imperfections in the rail
surface (corrugations, joints, welds, defects) and in the wheels (flats and shells), and from
the dynamic response of the track components to these actions.
The repercussions of the frequently large forces generated by these actions are many and
varied. Fatigue cracking in rails, plastic flow or shelling out of the rail head, uneven wear of
the rail head, cracking or splitting of sleepers, loosening of fasteners, grinding and
redistribution of ballast, and variations in track alignments and gauge are the major
deleterious effects. Such effects result in poor riding quality, reduced train speed, increased
fuel consumption, potential derailment, increased maintenance, delays and reduced level of
service, and loss of revenue in the longer term.
Consequently, the need for a coherent maintenance strategy rises. Many researchers, like
Baxter, 1993 have identified dynamic actions (i.e. the forces and stresses due to these

actions) to be the key to reducing track maintenance demands. It is for good reason that rail
authorities spend a large part of their maintenance budget on rail grinding and on ballast
tamping (to re-establish alignments thereby reducing train body motions and consequent
forces on the track). Furthermore, dynamics of vehicle/track interaction are the cause of
noise and vibration which have become issues of environmental concern.
In order to quantify the contribution of each factor to rail wear, this study simulated the
function of Bakerloo line, a metro line of London Underground and came to some important
results.
4.1 Simulation procedure

The British infrastructure manager currently uses the RES (Railway Engineering Simulator)
simulation, developed by London Underground, which is based on modelling the whole
metro network of the city of London. It includes a detailed description of the morphology of
network systems (gradient, straight/curve, junctions, positioning of platforms) as well traffic
control (signalling), the configuration of bogies and train timetables and journeys.
RES runs under UNIX and its outputs are resented as reports which are finally exported to
Microsoft Office Excel for further calculations. In the meantime, basic information is also
provided from WebGIS and Ellipse, which are two large and detailed databases containing
all the necessary maps and the planned improving works as well as historical data on rail
defection.
RES is used by the Modelling team of London Underground to watch the operation of the
network, point out the problematic parts and try to find the optimal solution in order to
overcome these problems. RES gives very accurate results concerning the trip and improves
train system performance feasibility and optimisation studies. This precision requires a time-
consuming encoding and simulation time relatively high if one wants to simulate many
scenarios of network configuration or the whole network. In order to specify the field of
study, the simulation of one metro line was chosen.
4.1.1 Modelling the Bakerloo line
Bakerloo line runs partly on the surface and partly at deep level, from Elephant and Castle in
the south-east to Harrow & Wealdstone in the north-west of London. The line serves 25
stations, of which 15 are underground. It is the seventh busiest line on the network.
This particular line was chosen as object of this study due to its high track curvature and also
due to a large volume of available data.

Fig. 4.2:.Map of the Bakerloo line (Source: LUL, 2011)
4.2 Rail Wear

One approach is that wear is the loss of material from the contacting surface due to rail-
wheel interaction. Rail operators currently use executive judgement and take decisions
based on experience and historical data to mitigate wear. Rail area head loss and rail wear
depend on train speed, axle load, rail-wheel material type, size and profile, track
construction, characteristics of bogie type, Million Gross Tonnes (MGT), curvature, traffic
type, lubrication, rail grinding, weather and environmental conditions. There is no
international standard available for rail-wheel lubrication and grinding, capable of
accurately predicting rail-wheel wear for monitoring and control. (Allen,2009)
Another approach is the energy dissipation model, which indicates that wear is proportional
to the work done by forces in sliding contact. Jendel (2002) expressed the wear coefficient
with sliding velocity on the horizontal axis and contact pressure on the vertical axis. Wear
model, using energy dissipation per running distance, can be expressed as wear index, as
follows:
T Ty y Tx x M z z Eq.1
Where
TXX= Product of creep forces and creepages in x direction, Tyy = Product of creep forces
and creepages in y direction and M = Spin moment. The energy dissipation T is defined as
the product of the creep forces and creepages, spin moment and spin, and is proportional to

the amount of wear. Relations between the energy dissipation and material worn off are
used for prediction of absolute wear.
The energy approach is adopted by the RES simulation process where research resulted in
an empirical relationship between the wear rate (mm2/1000 axles) and T. The validation of
the T energy method for wear has been carried out on UK mainline routes with peak
tonnages of no more than 20MGT tons per year. This is the gross tonnage that was used for
the calculation of rail wear in Bakerloo line.
4.3 Technical degradation factors causing rail wear

Rails are the most expensive component in the railway tracks. So, it is advantageous for rail
owners to be able to identify when to replace worn rail, not only for budgeting purposes,
but also for regular maintenance of rail for safe and reliable rail operation with increased
axle loads, speed and average gross tonnage per year which accelerate rail wear and rail
degradation, leading to rail breaks and derailments. (Ferreira,1997)
Wear of the rail surface acts to prevent the development of RCF by wearing away the
incipient cracks before they are able to grow. The formation of Rolling Contact Fatigue (RCF)
in rails is due to the combination of contact stress, tangential creep forces and creepage in
the wheel/rail contact patch. Most of these parameters cannot be measured directly with
current technology. However, the science of railway vehicle dynamics allows us to predict
with confidence what the values of these parameters are for a wide range of different
conditions. This gives a valuable insight into the influence of the many different factors that
affect the incidence of rail wear (Iwnicki, 2002). Most RCF damage in the UK is found in one
of two areas, either on the high rail in curved track or in sharp curves.
In this chapter, the contribution of technical factors (Fig.4.1) to rail wear is analysed. It is a
study in order to relate damage to track design, train services and vehicle characteristics.
4.3.1 The effect of track quality (geometric characteristics)
Introduction to curving behaviour

Railway vehicles operating in the UK use wheelsets comprising two wheels fixed to a
common axle. Wheels tend to roll in the direction in which they are facing. In a curve the
leading wheelset will tend to roll towards the outside of the curve, and the trailing wheelset
will tend to roll towards the inside, as shown in Fig.4.3. Because of the coning of the wheels,
as the leading wheelset moves outwards, the radius of the outer wheel becomes greater
than the inner wheel, as shown in Fig.4.3. As both wheels are rotating at the same speed,
the larger radius wheel tries to roll further than the smaller radius wheel, thus steering the
wheelset towards a radial alignment, when it will roll smoothly around the curve. The

opposite process happens on the trailing wheelset as it moves inwards on the curve.
(Iwnicki, 2002)
Fig.4.3: Vehicle on a curve and Rolling Radius difference (Source: Iwnicki S.D., 2002)
Fig. 4.4: Relation between Tg and track curvature (Strataki, 2011)
4.3.1.1Rail wear on sharp curves

Curve radius has a key influence on curving behaviour. If the curve radius is smaller, the
wheelset must rotate through a greater angle. Thus, greater lateral and longitudinal forces
are developed causing rail wear. Curving forces obtained in simulations concerning different
types of vehicles (i.e conventional, optimised conventional, novel steered) on different
radius, for a range of speed. It is shown that wear for curves radius smaller than 200m is
higher, compared to curves with bigger radius (Fig.4.5).Moreover experimental data have
shown that the needs in rail replacement or renewal are less important when the track is
straight (Fig.4.5).

Conventional HR
400 Conventional LR
Light Bogie HR
Light Bogie LR
350 Forced HR
Forced LR
Active (YR) HR
300
Severe Wear Zone Active (YR) LR
Active (AS) HR
Wear Number (Nm/m)
Active (AS) LR
250
200
Transition Zone
150
100
Mild Wear Zone

50
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Curve Radius(km)
Fig.4.5: Rail wear on sharp curves (Strataki, 2011)
Fig.4.6: Track life by curvature estimated (Source: London Underground)
4.3.1.2 Rail wear on high rails

Increasing cant deficiency increases the vertical loads to be carried by the high-rail wheels,
and reduces those on the low-rail wheels. It also requires greater lateral wheel/rail forces to
be generated to resist the centrifugal forces. Consequently, super-elevation increases the
deterioration of track, allows lower safety margin for curving and may result in unsafe wheel
force conditions. Curves with high super-elevation may also experience larger stresses in
the low rail when trains pass at lower speed than design speed (Profillidis, 2000).

High Rail RCF Damage, Axle 1, Varying Cant Deficiency

10
9 0
8
50
RCF Damage (10e-6 / Axle)
7
100
6
5 150
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000
Curve Radius (m)
Fig. 4.7: Cant deficiency and lateral acceleration(Source: Federal Railroad Administration, USA)
4.3.1.3 Flat bottom or Bull head rail cross sections

The standard form of rail used around the world is the "flat bottom" rail. It has a wide base
or "foot" and narrower top or "head". The UK introduced a type of rail which was not used
elsewhere. This was known as "Bullhead" rail and is shown in comparison with the standard
type in the diagram left.

Fig.4.8: Difference between flat-bottom and bullhead rail (Source: Wikipedia, 2011)
Bullhead rail was originally designed with reuse in mind. It was intended that it would be
turned over when the top had worn but this proved impossible because the underside also
wore where it had been secured to the sleeper. (Railway Technical Web Pages)
As far as the Bakerloo line is concerned, the London Underground has always used the old UK
standard bullhead rail weighing 95 lbs/yd and wooden sleepers. Only in the last few years
has there been a concerted effort to convert the track to flat bottom rail like the rest of the
world. So as the track has not been replaced yet, the calculation and the comparison of the
two track methods as far as rail wear is concerned werent possible.
4.3.2 The effect of train services
4.3.2.1 Train speed

Increasing the speed of trains has many effects on rail and track behaviour and degradation,
and has long been considered in regard to the level of noise and vibration experienced near
rail lines (eg Bubel, 1977).
In the case of a metro line the issue of high train speed is not important as the speed limit
between two stations is 25-30mph, which means 11,16-15,6m/s. However, high rail wear
rates have been measured close to the platforms. According to the historical data
concerning the rail defection of Bakerloo line, a rail defect is observed 45-50m before the
train arrives at each station. As it is seen in the Fig.4.9, speed profile is a repeated procedure
of accelerating, moving with a steady velocity and braking. In general, the train has to stop
almost every 1000m, or less, and then restart. This continuous accelerating/braking is the
major reason for rail wear due to train speed.
Braking forces modify conditions in the contact patch. It is generally believed that braking
forces are not a significant issue, as they act in the opposite direction to cause rail crack
propagation. This is confirmed by the tendency for RCF to occur on the high rail in curves,
where the steering forces are in the same direction as traction forces.

Fig.4.9: Speed profile of Bakerloo line (Data from London Underground)
4.3.2.2 Utilisation of network

Maintenance and renewal as well as lifetimes of track elements depend heavily on the
utilisation of networks. Data analysis has proven that maintenance expenditures can best be
harmonised according to train frequencies. Renewal expenditures are harmonised according
to gross tonnage which has a great impact on the wear and tear of the track.
The utilisation of networks has a strong impact on the cost of maintenance and on the
components technical life until replacement. Some major indicators are (Magel and Sroba,
2007):
Average frequencies of trains per year (Trains per Hour)
Average gross tonnage per year (traffic load)
In this model, transverse profiles are measured for outer and inner rails at 60 positions on
Bakerloo line. The rate of metal removal by rail grinding is about 0.2 mm across the railhead
for every 20 MGT which is the annual accumulated tonnage.
The vertical wear on the railhead h and the flange wear s, 14 mm down from the top of a
new rail profile as per BPU5035 Issue 2 dated 5 February 2002 on Railway Safety (Fig.4.10),
and relationships are explained in Equation 1.
Eq.1 :

Fig. 4.10: Central vertical wear h and side wear (Source: Cannon et al., 2003)
Fig.4.11: Measurement of rail wear (Strataki,2011)
4.3.3 The effect of Vehicle Characteristics
There are vehicle-related factors which affect RCF, and consequently the rail wear. These
are the configuration of the vehicle itself in particular the wheelbase and the primary yaw
suspension stiffness , the axle load and the wheel profile. The wheel profile is not an
independent variable; different vehicles use different wheel profiles for technical and
economic reasons. In this study, only the vehicle characteristics are analysed.
(Allen,2009,Iwnicki, 2002)
The Bakerloo Line service is operated from a fleet of 36 trains of 1972 Tube Stock. 1972
Tube Stock was built by Metro-Cammell between 1972 and 1974 and entered service on the
Northern Line between 1972 and 1975. 1972 Tube Stock car bodies are made up of a
welded steel underframe, riveted aluminium frame and aluminium panelling. There are
three types of vehicle; driving motor, uncoupling non-driving motor and trailer cars, formed
into 4-car and 3-car units. 4-car units have driving motor cars at each end and trailer cars in

the middle, 3-car units are made up of driving motor, trailer and uncoupling non-driving
motor.(Data from London Underground)
Fig.4.12: Sample train formations of 1972 Tube Stock showing how the four car unit could have a
3-car unit coupled at either end, either way round (Source: Report London Underground,2006)
The importance of primary yaw stiffness is already mentioned in order to achieve the
required rotation of the wheelset. The conventional rolling stock used in the Bakerloo Line
presents poor curving performance, thus technological options for new rolling stock for the
Bakerloo line according to the performance objectives are set by LUL.
The main performance objectives are:

Reduce energy consumption
Reduce track wear/damage
Reduce maintenance costs
The fundamental ways of achieving this is to reduce vehicle weight/passenger ratio and try
to find a bogie design in order to improve its curving performance. Towards this direction
different technological options are proposed such as:
Lightweight bogies
Mechanically steered bogies
Actively steered bogies
In order to reduce rail wear and maintenance track cost, LUL suggests the use of Track
Friendly bogies. For the purposes of this investigation we have defined a track friendly bogie
as a bogie/suspension system that can bring the following improvements to the railway and
rolling stock:

Increased energy efficiency: This figure is conservative with respect to the Bakerloo line as
it based on using less energy to drive the train due to less friction in curving and a lighter
bogie. The Bakerloo line is known for being very curvatious so the benefits could in fact
be greater.
Lower track maintenance: It is a significant factor but undefined as yet. As all the tracks
that currently have steering bogied trains also have conventional bogied trains.
Lower vehicle maintenance: Wheel life was extended by six times on high speed Swedish
trains where Track friendly bogies were firstly used. This represents a likely saving of up
to 63000 per train over the life of a 7 car train. This figure is based on anecdotal costs
received from LU and does not include any fixed or out of service costs.
Improved performance through curves: and therefore journey time
Reduced noise: Applies to Bakerloo line as it very curvatious and the majority of
wheel/track noise is generated through curves.
Improved ride quality: Applies to Bakerloo line as it very curvatious and lateral forces that
cause the car body to move laterally are a result of hunting and bad curving behaviour.
Improved passenger comfort
These benefits are brought about through implementing the ability to steer wheel sets
through curves, optimisation of damping in both primary and secondary suspension and
weight reduction. Obviously there are different ways of realising this functionality.
Fig.4.13: Bogie design for track friendly vehicles (Source: Stichel, Bombardier, 2007)

4.4 Maintenance and renewal activities

As the above factors cause rail wear, the necessity of track maintenance arises in order to
guarantee the quality of service and the safety.
Fig. 4.14: Schematic survey of maintenance and renewal process (Source: Esveld 2001)
Concerning Railways, track maintenance means the total process of maintenance and
renewal required to ensure that the track meets safety and quality standards. Ideally, this
goal should be achieved at minimum cost (Esveld, 2001). Note that minimizing maintenance
and renewal costs may not be equivalent to minimizing life-cycle costs.
However, the uncertainty about the future and the fact that some events may develop in
another way than expected, justifies the implementation of a track maintenance
management system as an important tool to handle strategic decision making, even in the
ideal case of optimising life-cycle cost a-priori for the infrastructure. Track maintenance
management is going to be presented in detail in the sixth chapter. On the role of
maintenance, Profillidis (2006) argues that with respect to safety, maintenance should be
preventive; regarding comfort, maintenance should be corrective; and finally, as regards the
economic aspects of maintenance, an optimum solution should be sought, so as to ensure a
satisfactory safety margin and prevent a quick degradation of track quality. In fact, efficient
management of track maintenance depends largely on data acquisition through manual or
automatic inspection, but also on track deteriorating or degradation models and the
consequent planning of maintenance activities, taking into account the cost and availability
of resources. The next section will focus on the importance of inspection to maintenance
and renewal activities.

4.4.1 Inspection of Rail Wear
Inspection involves more than just the inevitable measurement of defects for correction in
maintenance works, as the measurement of accelerations to guarantee passenger comfort,
measurement of forces or even inspection of rolling stock. However, the objective of
inspection is not only to assure the non-existence of any faults that might lead to accidents,
but also to monitor successive degradation in infrastructure in order to prevent faults and to
provide the infrastructure manager with information for short and long term planning of
maintenance activities (Andersson, 2002).
Once the rails are in track, they are subject to regular and frequent visual inspection for
gross defects. However, most defects are hidden and therefore not detectable by visual
inspection. Hence various types of non-destructive testing techniques are employed. (British
Railway Track)
In the case of the study of Bakerloo line, the data concerning the rail defection were
collected during a 10-year-period by the use of visual and ultra-sonic method.
Visual inspection is the primary and the most easily applied method for detecting and
evaluating defects. However, there are cases where other methods of testing are required
to show the severity of the visual defect. Conversely, there are cases where visual
indications can lead to an incorrect conclusion, such as interpreting the fusion lines at a
weld boundary as a defect. In cases of doubt the method of visual inspection is used in
combination with other methods.
The ultrasonic examination of rails for internal defects is carried out on a regular basis by
pedestrian operators or a rail borne ultrasonic testing unit. During the ultrasonic
examination the flaw detector equipment produces a short electrical pulse which is applied
to a piezo-electric transducer. It has the ability of converting an electrical pulse into an
acoustic pulse and conversely of converting an acustic pulse into an electric pulse. The
probes are manufactures to produce a beam of ultrasound which propagates into the rail at
a given angle. The commonly used angles are 0 , 40 and 70 .
Conclusion
This chapter is focused on the technical factors affecting rail wear based on real life data
from the Bakerloo line of London Underground. The most important result of the simulation
is the role of track curvature in rail wear. In the current model no account was taken of
traffic type: the wear rate was defined as a statistical distribution that was a function of
curve radius. Current developments in the model have focused on providing a more
analytical base for the model so that predictions of wear rates at different sites can be made

and linked to the level of traffic seen at each site. Furthermore, bogie design and
configuration cannot be neglected as they can contribute to improve track performance.

COST
5.DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTEGRATED MODEL FOR ESTIMATION OF EXPECTED

MAINTENANCE COST
As it is indicated in the previous chapter there are many technical factors which cause the
degradation of track condition. So the necessity of developing a cost model has risen in order
to better predict and manage the cost of maintenance and renewal activities. Several cost
models have been used in the field of railway infrastructure over the years, such as Life Cycle
Cost (LCC). These cost models while taking decisions on maintenance and renewal actions
rarely consider the whole life cycle perspective of the infrastructure. The important aspect of
life cycle cost analysis is to understand the factors that influence the LCC and the parameters
that are needed to estimate it. The field of this study is limited to the maintenance phase of
the whole life cycle. This chapter discusses the railway infrastructures need for LCC, the
main obstacles to LCC implementation on Railways. Finally, a statistical analysis of the
London Underground data is realised for the evaluation of the life span of the Bakerloo line.
Introduction
Railway infrastructure is a large and complex system with a long useful life. Therefore, once
installed, it is very difficult and costly to modify the initial design. Thus the performance of
the infrastructure depends on the maintenance and renewal decisions taken during its life
cycle. Responsibilities for parts of the railway system are often handed over to different
factors. In order to guarantee optimal long-term results for the railway systems the effects
of decision should be systematically evaluated (Zoeteman, 1999).
The factors influencing the performance of the railway infrastructure and their relationship
need to be identified in order to estimate life cycle costs. The driving factor causing failures
and maintenance is the degradation of the asset. Track degradation depends on many
factors, such as initial quality of construction, the quality of the substructure and the loads
on the track as well as the level of maintenace. Besides asset degradation, there are other
factors that also influence the life cycle costs, such as the RAMS targets for the track, the
amount of preventive maintenance, market prices of labour, materials and machines, and
the operational characteristics of the line (such as axle loads, traffic intensities and the
duration of train free periods). The infrastructure manager can manage some of these
factors directly (e.g. maintenance strategy) or with the cooperation of transport operators
(e.g. quality of rolling stock) and government (e.g. negotiated grant). Exogenous factors,
such as the condition of the soil and the interest rate, will also influence life cycle costs
(Zoeteman, 2001).
The performance of the railway infrastructure is defined as the level of safety, riding
comfort, noise, vibrations, reliability, availability and the costs of ownership (Fig.5.1). Safety

COST
and noise standards indirectly influence the life cycle costs, since they determine the
tolerances and thresholds for design and maintenance parameters.
Fig. 5.1: Factors influencing the performance of track infrastructure (Source: Zoeteman 2001)
5.1 Life Cycle Cost (LCC) theory

Life Cycle Cost analysis is a process that involves structuring costs, but most of all assessing
the costs of a product throughout its different life-cycle phases, so that producers and
consumers are more informed, contributing to a more conscious decision-making process.
In fact, one important output of a Life Cycle Cost analysis is the identification of cost drivers,
meaning the activities that most contribute to the overall life-cycle cost. Apart from
identifying cost drivers and representing a useful cost structuring framework, LCC
determines cost-effectiveness of alternative investments and business decisions. Therefore,
it may represent a valuable input for a multicriteria model to support decision-making.
In order to be realistic, an LCC model should represent to the better extent possible the
characteristics of the product, its intended use environment, maintenance policy as well as
any constraints or limitations economical or financial. Moreover, it should be
comprehensive, including every factor relevant to LCC, though simple enough to be useful
to support quick decision making, updating or any future modification. Therefore, it should
be flexible and designed in such a way that permits evaluating specific elements of LCC
independent from the others. In practical terms, a simple LCC model is basically an

COST
accounting structure that contains mathematical expressions to estimate the cost

associated with each of the cost elements constituting the LCC.
Life cycle cost is defined as all costs associated with the system life cycle (Blanchard, 1995)
which includes:
Research and development cost
Production and construction cost
Operation and maintenance cost
System retirement and phase out cost
Fig.5.2: Life Cycle Cost of a railway system (Source: Putallaz, 2007)
Railway infrastructure as a product has its own specifications. Since railway infrastructure
has a long life span and investments are very costly, maintenance decisions should be made
from a life-cycle cost perspective. LCC is particularly important in order to develop an
optimal maintenance strategy.
5.1.1 LCC in Railways: the Zoeteman model
According to Zoeteman (2001), life cycle cost can be presented in three different ways: total
present value (TPV), internal rate of return (IRR), and annual equivalent or annuity (ANN).
Total Present Value (TPV)

In the LCC method the TPV mostly concerns costs; incomes can be expressed as negative
costs. The larger the TPV, the less attractive is the investment compared to other alternative
investments or maintenance. Investments made at different times have different economic
values. To take these into account, all future costs are discounted to convert them to
present values of cost.

COST
Total Present Value is given by:
Where Ci = sum of all costs incurred in year i, r = discount rate, i = year of analysis.
Internal Rate of Return (IRR)
Internal rate of return (IRR) is a method defined as the percentage earned on the amount of
capital invested in each year of the life of the project after allowing for the repayment of the
sum originally invested. It shows the profitability of an investment compared to alternative
investments or maintenance strategies. The IRR is the discounting rate, at which the present
values of costs and benefits are equal, NPV = 0.
The higher the IRR, the better is the investment. If it is greater than the discounting rate,
then the investment is economically justified.
Where: Ci = sum of all costs incurred in year I, r = discount rate, i = year of analysis
Annual Equivalent or Annuity (ANN)

ANN is the sum of interest and amortisation, which has to be paid every year to finance the
investments and maintenance. With the annuity, projects of different lifespans can be
compared. The annual performance fee (ANN) is calculated from the flowing formula. It
determines the cost incurred every year to maintain the track.
Where: i = year of analysis, n=years
Cost-benefit analysis can be done by estimating Net Present Value by calculating the
residual value of the asset and the cost saved by increasing the residual life of the asset by
proper maintenance actions. For effective analysis of life cycle cost of the track
infrastructure, it is necessary to understand all the factors that influence the LCC as well as
the parameters that are required for the analysis.
3.25.2 Main obstacles to LCC implementation on Railways

The decision making process needs to get a quantitative insight into the impact of a specific
decision on the life cycle costs. In the meantime, LCC requires favourable conditions for
acquiring reliable data in practical time for decision-making. Sometimes, consistent
empirical data on maintenance costs and on level of degradation of different components of

COST
the infrastructure are missing or it is extremely time-consuming to collect them compared

to expert opinion-based inputs. Although decision-makers face the unavailability of data,
civil infrastructures are still assets that degrade slower than mechanical equipment,
providing them with more time and reliable data. LCC analysis should start in an early stage
assessing then the uncertainties attached. However, in civil infrastructures, LCC may be an
appropriate means to apply the principle of user-payer through fair taxation, aggregating
the necessary societal support among stakeholders (citizens, private sector, operators, and
final consumers). In Railway infrastructure, LCC application still lacks a more integrative
perspective.
Various research papers (Espling, Patra 2007) propose to identify and describe factors
influencing the development of a proactive strategy for operation and maintenance of
infrastructure, and then formulating a conceptual maintenance framework, taking into
account factors such as outsourcing and partnering, benchmarking and risk management. In
fact, it is concluded that including partnering in maintenance strategy between different
actors brings significant advantages: cost reduction, time savings (e.g. reduction on train
delays by increasing reliability and availability) and improved project quality.
Therefore, studying Life-cycle Cost became extremely important as one of the European
commission objectives is reducing the life-cycle cost of railway infrastructure by 30%.
Therefore, this study may be useful for a more integrated approach to the TEN-T project, so
that it will gradually achieve excellent performance, with best practices in terms of design
and maintenance from a life-cycle perspective, but also more conscious and transparent
decision-making processes and the necessary evaluation of risks and uncertainties inherent
to investments of this nature.
5.3 Approach to Track Maintenance Cost Model in Bakerloo line

Service life prediction should be done with a lot of care as it determines the point of
reinvestment for the track. Service life period for LCC analysis is determined by the following
measures:
Technical life period of the system

Economical life period of the system
While determining service life period for the track system, infrastructure managers should
consider the following things:
The time period should be considered in such a way that most of the track components
should have at least one entire life span.

COST
Too long time periods will account for a great deal of uncertainty in terms of failures and
maintenances and thereby increase the overall risk on the asset.
The decision on life period should be taken by considering the guidelines and standards on
the track service life period.
It is difficult to assess the technical life period of the track because it is highly dependent on
the external parameters such as traffic volume, tonnage but also on the driving behaviour
for the manual operated trains. Also, combinations of lower life components (e.g. switches)
and higher life components (e.g. ballast) make it even more difficult to determine the
service life period of the system.
The following steps can be considered while taking decisions on the service life estimation
of the track (Lounis et al, 1999):
Measurement of condition or performance profile of the track: The current conditions of

the track should be measured and the future condition should be simulated with time as a
result of degradation and maintenance.
Measurement of risk profile: Risk associated with degradation and maintenance of the
track must be measured in terms of cost and simulated with time to see the risk profile in
the life cycle.
Maintenance cost profile: Current maintenance cost of the track must be calculated and
then simulated with time in order to have a maintenance cost profile over a period of time.
A decision on the life cycle can be made by putting weighting factors on the measured
profile discussed above.
5.4 Cost Modelling in London Underground

London Underground functions under the Public Private Partnership structure. The overall
transport policy goal is to provide a system of transport for citizens and the business sector
all over the country that is both economically effective and sustainable in the long term. The
five sub-goals of the overall goal are: (Data from London Underground)
1. An accessible transport system

2. A high standard transport quality
3. Safe traffic
4. A good environment
5. Positive regional development
The cost modelling at London Underground considers that goals mentioned above are met
and provide a system of transport that is both economically effective and sustainable. It

COST
generally uses the following cost modelling steps. The information was collected from
personal consultations with experts in London Underground from the Strategy and
Commercial department. The steps of the cost modelling are:
1. Conceptual study: It deals with the details and the consequences of the investment (the
damage model output will then be related to operational OPEX- and capital maintenance
expenditures CAPEX- by LU for input into the final business case model).
2. Pre study: It is based on a long lifespan of up to 60 years. The calculation in this phase is
to show the gains for society, and the consequences.
3. Railway Investigation: This phase deals with exploration of new ground, vibration, noise,
pollution, etc.
4. Railway plan: It deals with whether any new ground/ land are needed.
5. System documentation: It deals with actual cost planning.
6. Construct documentation: Prepares the documents for construction.
7. Construction
8. Delivery
The decision for renewal includes steps 4 8. The decision for renewal is based on judgment
of asset condition and analysis of the operational situation. The calculation cost is based on
historical data. If the renewal can be done within the budget, it is planned and done, but if
more budgets needed, normally steps 4 8 are followed, and then this is put into the
administration plan for next year.
As LCC is being used in every step of the process for taking decision, the need is to develop
an effective procedure to calculate LCC so as to take correct decisions on maintenance,
renewal and investment.
5.4.1 Track Maintenance Cost - Track Lifespan
An important aspect of rail infrastructure is that the assets have long life spans and once
they are installed it is very expensive and complicated to modify the initial design. Thus, we
created a model to estimate the track maintenance cost. In order to do this, the track is first
divided into 5 categories according to their curvature radius:
< 200 m 200 400 m 400 600 m 600 800 m > 800 m
Each type of curvature is associated with appropriate length (meter) and average wear rates
(Joule/meter). The wear rates are obtained from wheel rail simulation where the data is
expected to be high on sharp curve (<200 m) and low on smooth curve (>800 m). The
average wear rates are derived from different passenger loadings and mode of operations.

COST
The following chart summarise the process to obtain track maintenance cost:
Passenger Operational
loading modes
Wear rates from wheel-rail

interface model (Average
wear rates per trip)
Existing Future
average wear average wear
Existing Future
rates rates
annual no annual no
of trips of trips
Calculate weighted annual Calculate weighted annual Calculate weighted annual

energy lost on track (Wear energy lost on track (Wear energy lost on track (Wear
rates per trip * annual no of rates per trip * annual no of rates per trip * annual no of
trips) trips) trips)
Measured
existing
average
wear rates
Predicted Existing
Predicted Existing
average lifespan with Predicted Future
average lifespan
future wear rates average lifespan
(using regression)
(using regression)
Annual track Annual track

maintenance OPEX maintenance OPEX
Fig.5.3:Utilising wheel-rail interface model wear rate output to predict average lifespan and
annual track maintenance cost (Source: London Underground)
As illustrated in Fig.5.3, the existing average wear rates are obtained from wheel rail
simulator. Multiplying this value with the existing annual number of trips by link and type of
curve will derive the annual energy lost on track. These values are weighted according to the
length of the curvature type to get the weighted annual energy lost on track. In order to
predict the existing average lifespan, the measured existing average wear rates are obtained
from track engineer. Together with the weighted annual energy lost on track, these figures
are plotted and a regression curve is derived to produce the predicted existing average

COST
lifespan. Annual track maintenance is then calculated from the average of occurrences of
defined projects during the lifespan.
Having worked out the predicted existing average lifespan, the predicted future average
lifespan is then estimated. There are no figures for the measured future average lifespan (no
one knows the future), one needs to find the predicted existing average lifespan but with
future wear rates in order to populate the predicted future average lifespan.
The predicted existing average lifespan with future wear rates is derived by using the same
procedures as obtaining the predicted existing average lifespan. The only difference is that
the future wear rates are used instead of the existing.
From the predicted existing average lifespan with future wear rates estimated previously, a
linear adjustment is made to forecast the predicted future average lifespan. Before that,
future weighted annual energy lost on track is estimated by multiplying the future number
of trips and future average wear rates. After obtaining these two figures, the annual track
maintenance costs are estimated for future train operation.
5.4.2 Track Maintenance Point Ends Lifespan
The location of point ends are divided into five categories according to the type of curvature
they are located:
< 200 m 200 400 m 400 600 m 600 800 m > 800 m
The following chart summarises the process of estimating the point ends lifespan:

COST
Existing Change in annual

Overall existing
wear unit energy lost on track
average lifespan
rates from existing
Future wear
unit rates
Overall
maximum
lifespan
Lifespan curve Annual Lifespan curve

y=a0*x+b tonnage y=a1*x+b
Existing average Future average

lifespan by lifespan by
categories categories
Fig.5.4:Predicting lifespan for point ends (Source: London Underground)
The existing wear unit rates under each of these categories are obtained from the track
engineer. The average and maximum lifespan for all the point ends are also known. So, from
the values a lifespan curve is plotted and the existing weighted average lifespan for each
category is estimated from the following equation:
y = a0*x + b where,
y = estimated lifespan
a0 = existing wear unit rates
b = lifespan for no traffic (maximum lifespan)
x = annual tonnage
In previous section (Track Maintenance Track Lifespan), the change in annual energy lost
on track from the existing has been calculated. So, from these values the future wear unit
rates is estimated by the following equation:
a1 = a0*(Change in annual energy lost on track (kJ/m) due to track wear rates)
Where, a0 = existing wear unit rates

a1 = future wear unit rates

COST
The following equation has been used to get the point ends lifespan curve for the future
operation:
y = a1*x + b where,
y = estimated lifespan
a1 = future wear unit rates
b = lifespan for no traffic (maximum lifespan)
x = annual tonnage
From the lifespan curve, the future weighted average lifespan for each categories of curve
can be derived. Finally, the annual cost can be computed by multiplying the cost per project
with the number of occurrences over the lifespan.
Fig.5.5: Existing Lifespan (Strataki,2011)

COST
Fig.5.6: Curve fitting based on Annual Energy Lost (Strataki,2011)
Fig.5.7: Lifespan Curve according to Annual Tonnage and Track Curvature (Strataki,2011)
5.5 Cost Estimation in Maintenance Phase

In order to deal with the difficulty to establish a clear link between the Wear Numbers
calculated in the simulations for the different types of bogie and their impact in track
maintenance and renewal cost, at least an upper and a lower limit to the costs will be
estimated.

COST
- Lower limit: the costs calculated based on the assumption that all the costs of track
maintenance and renewal are related to the wear number. This approach overestimates
the benefits any wear number reduction, as there will be maintenance work and
renewals that are not directly linked to wear-related issues.
800 to 200 m Tangent to 800 m

Sub 200 m curves
curves curves
Costs proportional to
920.7 /(m year) 397.5 /(m year) 248.5 /(m year)
Wear
Costs independent of
0 /(m year) 0 /(m year) 0 /(m year)
Wear
- Upper limit: It is assumed that all the costs corresponding to curves over 800 m radius
are completely independent of the Wear Numbers (i.e. they are not affected by
improvements in curving). The same value of the cost- unit is used for the cost
independent to wear for all the track curvatures. This approach underestimates the
benefits of any reduction of the wear number, as in practice curves over R=800 m will
still be affected by the improvement of steering and the reduction of Wear Numbers.
800 to 200 m Tangent to 800 m

Sub 200 m curves
curves curves
Costs proportional to
672.2 /(m year) 149.0 /(m year) 0 /(m year)
Wear
Costs independent of
248.5 /(m year) 248.5 /(m year) 248.5 /(m year)
Wear
Conclusion
This chapter focuses on a Life Cycle Costing approach which has been developed to support
railway design and maintenance processes. It focuses on the major indicators determining
an Track Maintenance Cost by presenting the process of Cost Modelling in London
Underground. Moreover, the difficulties of implementing the LCC are mentioned in an
attempt to identify and describe factors influencing the development of a proactive strategy
for operation and maintenance of infrastructure.

6.TRACK MAINTENANCE PLANNING
6. TRACK MAINTENANCE PLANNING

This chapter describes the basic principles of Track Maintenance Planning. It includes the
short and long maintenance needs in the context of maintenance optimisation. Finally, the
railway quality of service is illustrated.
Introduction
Maintenance is defined as the combination of all technical and administrative actions,
including supervisory actions, intended to retain an item in, or restore it to, a state where it
can perform a required function (IEV 191-01-07, 2007). Maintenance has long been
considered as a reactive, fire fighting approach. However, as dependability targets of the
assets have become increasingly important, several proactive maintenance approaches and
methods are being developed. All the decisions related to the rail track maintenance are
taken in order to keep a balance between economic and safety aspects. The goal is to find
the effective maintenance procedure to optimise the track possession period and train
speed restriction regime and ultimately increase the track availability.
Different components of the railway asset are structurally and economically

interdependent. Scale effects are involved in their maintenance and renewal, while their
degradation is often structurally related. As operations have to be continued on the rail
network and budgets are often restricted, all kinds of constraints have to be considered in
the planning of infrastructure maintenance.
The concepts of the maintenance planning process are developed in the following steps
(Zoeteman, 2006):
Generation of maintenance strategies for each individual asset (e.g. corrective or
preventive, time based or condition based, strategies are distinguished based on criticality
of the individual asset for the entire production system)
Definition of clustering rules, which optimise the frequencies of activities on the basis of
scale or scope effects
Definition of rules for assigning time windows to maintain packages on the basis of
opportunities that occur in the middle or short term.

Fig.6.1: Maintenance planning overview (Source: Zarembski, 1998)
6.1 Evaluation of maintenance needs State of the art

Maintenance and renewal activities of track absorb a major part of
maintenance budget in rail infrastructure. Hence, predicting the future maintenance needs
has always been a concern of rail infrastructure managers. The ability to predict the medium
and long term needs of work allows not only to frame the necessary budget (and initiate the
adequate political processes to get it) but also to evaluate different policies of track
maintenance. The assessment of maintenance needs is a procedure more or less
complicated depending on whether we are interested in short-term forecasts or middle and
long term.
6.1.1 Framework for analysing the short terms needs
Predicting short term maintenance needs (6 months to 2 years) typically consists of

compiling the suggestions made by maintenance crews on site.
Usually, the total of the proposed work exceeds the available maintenance budget, thus the
infrastructure manager must make a choice. This choice is based on expertise, negotiations
between different actors and estimation of the Internal Rate of Return (IRR).
The introduction of management method via the risk tends to improve the relevance of
choosing the best investment process. LU applies the risk analysis method by studying the
different scenarios in order to prioritize the proposed interventions according to their
criticality. However, a risk analysis of Bakerloo line is not provided in this study.
Such an approach has the advantage of structured reasoning, is based on the following 3
steps:
identification of hazards (possible failures of infrastructure) and corrective maintenance

impact assessment of each hazard on the security, availability and sustainability of

the system
calculation of the severity of risk and prioritizing maintenance projects proposed.
Therefore, the manager acquires an integrated vision of all the projects to be implemented
(called risk portfolio). He can set a budget threshold and afterwards observe its impact on
the overall risks of its infrastructure. Management by risk analysis provides a solution that
seems to have a promising future and is widely used by the railway infrastructure
companies.
6.1.2 Framework for analyzing the long term performance
Design and maintenance decisions can only be taken responsibly, when the costs and
performance of decision alternatives are considered on a long-term, life-cycle basis. This
also includes the delivered availability and reliability, since the infrastructure performance
influences the costs and revenues of the operations. (Zoeteman, 2001)
The assessment of middle and long term maintenance needs raises the problem of modeling
the behavior of the infrastructure under load traffic. Theoretical analysis of the oscillating
system "vehicle - wheel - rail - fasteners - floor - ballast - ground "is complex. The situation
becomes more difficult when it is tried to apply the theoretical concepts
to practice, particularly because of the intense heterogeneity of the characteristics
vehicle dynamics and track components, including the basement.
Under these circumstances, it becomes difficult to establish a general model of predicting

maintenance needs based on the mechanisms of track degradation.
The laws governing the behavior of track degradation can be
established only locally. Several research centers or railway infrastructure companies have
launched the development of models capable of predicting the middle and long terms
maintenance needs based on the mechanisms of track degradation. (Putallaz,2007)
Most of these models and predictor systems are based (to varying degrees) upon historical
data obtained from local measurements of track condition and of maintenance activity and
costs, expected lifetimes of track components, and locally developed algorithms which
extrapolate the data for future maintenance planning; other models are centred mainly on
stresses in rails and sleepers. In these models, dynamic forces are derived for calculation of
stresses in some of the components of the track for factors such as axle load, train speed,
and gross tonnage of traffic. These models, despite their differences, are based on the
following structure.

Many of these techniques use the Markov decision process. It is a stochastic procedure,
where the prediction of the future situation, present-based, does not require the knowledge
of the past. (Ferreira, 1997)
6.2 Maintenance Optimisation

Operations Research techniques, such as the Markov decision process, have seen
application in the development of planning systems for deteriorating assets such as road
pavements. Those techniques are increasingly seen as providing the theoretical framework
for road pavement management systems. Such models take into account the fact that
pavement condition is difficult to forecast with precision.
Another approach uses the stochastic dynamic programming to solve maintenance

optimisation models based on a Markov decision process (Madanat, 1993). These models
minimise total life-cycle costs including maintenance, repair and replacement, inspection,
and user costs. A proxy is used for user costs in the form of a condition constraint (minimum
allowable state). The models consider maintenance and inspection decisions jointly. The
objective function to be minimised includes decisions about when an inspection should be
undertaken, as well as what type of maintenance activity should be carried out. This
approach insures that an inspection is made only when its cost is offset by a resultant
reduction in expected future costs.
6.2.1 Applicability to rail track maintenance
Fig. 6.2 shows the elements of a decision support system for track maintenance planning.
An important element of such a model is the explicit inclusion of risk variables to deal with
the ijmpact of track condition on train transit times, reliability of arrivals,
accident/derailment potential, and ultimately rail business revenue.

Fig.6.2: Track Maintenance Optimisation Parameters (Source:Ferreira,1997)
As shown in Fig. 6.2, the optimisation model needs to take into account the dynamic nature
of the relationship between track condition and maintenance activity. Equations (1) and (2)
highlight that relationship. For each line segment, the maintenance activity required at time
period c is a function of observed track condition during time c-1; traffic related variables;
risk related variables; and environmental factors. Track performance in time period c is a
function of the amount of maintenance activity since the last major rehabilitation, as well as
traffic and environmental factors.
(1)
(2)
Where: TC = Track Condition

MA= Maintenance Activity
TK= Traffic task
R= Set of risk related variables
S=Speed regime

AX= Axle load regime

t= time period, c=current period, T=ultimate planning horizon
e1, e2 = error terms
6.3 Strategic axes in maintenance optimisation

There are four principal strategic axes regarding maintenance optimisation:
The interventions for the amelioration of track design. This includes the technical
installations required (new track, additional lane etc.).
The substance of railway infrastructure, more specifically the residual life of the
infrastructure.
The technology of railway infrastructure components such as signalling, electrification,
track on ballast etc.
The quality of railway infrastructure components such as track geometry, the structural
materials (timber, concrete), technology of rolling stock.
In this study, we are going to present only the role of the substance of railway infrastructure
and of the quality of railway infrastructure components in achieving maintenance
optimisation, as the other two axes concerning track morphology and technology acquire a
wider framework of research.
Thus, in order to create a clearer figure of the role of these two optimisation axes, the
following schema was created (Fig.6.3).

Fig.6.3: Analysis of an Optimisation model in Railway industry (Source: Venkatarami, 2007)
Vertical loads can cause track degradation but also rail wear due to wheel/rail interface.
There appears to be no accepted simulation methods for assessment of vertical track
degradation, it becomes therefore necessary to adopt strategies in order to plan the required
actions that can restore track geometry and preserve the rolling stock status and quality. It
seems logical that the newer the rail is, the fewer maintenance actions are needed. The young
rails have a better behaviour towards vertical loads. Thus, the first axe of optimisation consists
of deciding which the best moment for renewal activities is, taking into consideration how
these actions can affect the network capacity.
Consequently, the goal of the first axe is to optimise the track substance with a respect to the
network capacity.
As far as the second axe is concerned, it is clear that there is a strong correlation and
interaction between track quality and rolling stock condition. Track geometry of poor quality

increases the rate of degradation of rolling stock and worn rolling stock can no longer
maintain a rate of track degradation. But, on the other hand, ensure excellent track quality is
very expensive. So the second axe tries to handle the following problem: choose the level of
track quality and of rolling stock which can minimise the cost of long term maintenance
needs.
The first optimisation axe consists of defining the best strategy for renewal activities, while
the second optimisation axe consists of defining the best maintenance strategy. It should be
noted that according to logic, firstly we should ameliorate the maintenance strategies and
then those of renewal.
Conclusion
Track maintenance policies have traditionally been viewed as engineering led decisions.
There is a need to focus effort into the development of tools to assist track maintenance
planning in the context of formulating a conceptual maintenance framework. This overall
aim can be achieved by combining research into track degradation with well established
operations research techniques. The integration of socio-economic parameters in the
simulation process provides an objective basis for comparison of different maintenance
policies. Although such approaches have been successfully applied to the maintenance of
many transport systems, they have yet to see application in track maintenance
management.

7.CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
7. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
This chapter discusses the findings of the present research. Furthermore, it presents the
research contributions and the scope for future research.
7.1 Results
The purpose of this research work is to develop an approach for track maintenance planning
in relation to the technical and economical aspects of railway infrastructure system. There
are three research questions that have been formulated.
The first research question is in an aggregated level of defining the interdependence

between some technical characteristics of railway infrastructure and rail wear (Chapter 4).
Data from the London Underground have been used for the simulation of track geometry in
Bakerloo line and also information on traffic load, vehicle configuration as well as historical
data on rail defection. Even if it was difficult to find all these information due to lack of an
organised archive in LU, the meeting with some track engineering experts was helpful. The
most crucial conclusion was the large impact that a small radius can have to rail wear. It is
provided that rail wear is more intense and common on sharp curves, where rolling contact
fatigue plays a major role.
The second research question looks into an approach to Track Maintenance Model in order
to correlate track maintenance planning with the cost and damage model of a railway
infrastructure system via the analysis of its life span (Chapter 5). For this research work,
statistical methods were used representing the operation of a railway infrastructure system.
The final third question treats the subject of maintenance optimisation (Chapter 6). The
dissertation project proposes also an evaluation of the maintenance needs in short and
middle and long term which combine the assessment of hazards and the dynamic forces.
Finally, the impact of maintenance policies over the long term is presented as far as the
capacity of network is concerned.
7.2 Research contribution

The management world of railway infrastructure is characterized by the existence
of excessive internal borders which delay the progress of the sector and prevent the
emergence technical solutions and strategic innovations. This study aims, by its freshness
and openness, introducing some ideas about it.
On the other hand, the thesis shows that a rigorous research was conducted regarding the
problem of management of a railway infrastructure network. It bases its approach on the
theoretical principles of the systemic model and then creates a technical model for the
infrastructure. This opposes to the managerial models that lead to reforms in railway
systems, without actually improving their performance. This thesis aims to focus the debate
on the finality of railway systems.
7.3 Scope for further research

The overall aim for infrastructure managers is to find ways to eliminate, or at least manage
the problem in the most cost-effective way. So a tool, which can be used to evaluate
alternative maintenance strategies and to prioritise maintenance effort across a railway
network, should be developed. The model can also be used to investigate the benefits of
changes in traffic characteristics (eg. higher speeds and axle-loads); changes in track design
standards; changes in track components (eg. rail, sleeper types); and to simulate the likely
effect on business activity of changes in track maintenance policies and design standards. As
well as track degradation modules, the maintenance optimisation model will include
business risk such as delay costs, accident and derailment risk. Such a model is likely to lead
to very significant track productivity gains. This is particularly so in cases where current
practices rely on traditionally very conservative engineering judgment. Considerable
research needs to be done to better understand the effect of track forces on deterioration
so that future condition can be predicted and appropriate maintenance strategies applied.
However, the current research project will make use of available microscopic models to
serve as analytical tools within a total system approach to planning future maintenance
requirements.
As far London Underground is concerned, an update of RES software is required in order to

better simulate the phenomenon of rail wear. The approach of this phenomenon via
mathematical formulas could quantify in an accurate way the track degradation so this
could facilitate the process of maintenance decision.
Furthermore, the current models are essentially 2D models, since the elements lie in a plane
(i.e. cross-section through the rail, wheel, etc.), although the subsurface stress distribution
arising from a 3D Hertz elliptic contact can be applied to the elements. The next step is to
extend the 3D model with the ability to include stick/slip in the contact area.
Conclusion
In order to do a more integrated analysis, the rationalisation of socio-economic parameters
into the modelling procedure should be taken into consideration. In that way, a more sound
and objective basis for the comparison of the different maintenance policies can be created.
But the restricted field of this study does not allow realising also this approach.
Whether infrastructure is privately or publicly owned, it is important to ensure that the

owner has sufficient incentive to move towards the most productive maintenance methods,

as well as the most effective long-term track standards. This will require investment
decisions to be made related to assets which might have an economic life of 50 years (eg.
concrete sleepers). Long-term commitments from operators will be required in such cases.

REFERENCES
REFERENCES
1. AFNOR (2001), Terminologie de la maintenance, Association Franaise de Normalisation.
2.Aknin P. (2011), Qualit et Scurit Ferroviaire: De la scurit a la fiabilit, Mi-parcours

du Prdt 4 : le Carrefour de la Recherche et de lInnovation dans les transports
terrestres, Bordeaux.
3. Allen P. (2009), Support of ITT for Next Generation LU Rolling Stock, Rail Technology
Unit, Manchester Metropolitan University, Report 104/02.
4. Allen P. (2010), LUL Design Study - Concept Vehicle Dynamic Simulation Results, Rail
Technology Unit, Manchester Metropolitan University, Report 104/09.
5. Andersson M. (2002), Strategic Planning of Track Maintenance - State of the Art,

Research Report, Division of Urban Studies, Department of Infrastructure, Royal Institute
of Technology, (KTH), Sweden, ISSN: 1651-0216.
6. Bakerloo Line facts,

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/modesoftransport/londonunderground/keyfacts/1316
2.aspx
7. Baxter M.I. (1993), Dynamics holds the key to whole life costs, Railway Gazette
International, Great Britain ,Reed Business Publishing, Sutton, v 149 n 5 p 295-298.
8. Blanchard B.S., Verma D. and Peterson E.L. (1995), Maintainability: A Key to Effective
Serviceability and Maintenance Management, New York, John Willey and Sons Inc.
9. Cannon D.F. et al. (2003), Rail defects: an overview, Fatigue Fracture of Engineering
Materials and Structures, 26.10, 865-886.
10. Cooper D.R. and Schindler, P.S. (2006), Business Research Methods, Singapore,
McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Ninth Edition, ISBN 007-124430-1
11. Dane F.C. (1990), Research method, California, Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
12. Donnadieu et.al (2003), L'Approche systmique : de quoi s'agit-il ? , Synthse des
travaux du Groupe AFSCET " Diffusion de la pense systmique".
13. EC, European Communities (2001), WHITE PAPER, European transport policy for 2010:
time to decide, ISBN: 92-894-0341-1.
14. EN 50126 (1999), The Specification and Demonstration of Reliability, Availability,

Maintainability and Safety (RAMS) for Railways Application, Comit Europen de
Normalisation Electrotechnique (CENELEC), Brussels.
15. Esveld C. (2001), Modern Railway Track, TUDelft, Second Edition.

REFERENCES
16.Ferreira L. (1997), Modelling rail track deterioration and maintenance: current practices
and future needs, Transport Reviews, 17 (3), 207-221, Australia.
17. IUC, International Union of Railways, CER, Community of European Railway and
Infrastructure Companies (2008), Rail Transport and Environment: Facts and Figures.
18.Iwnicki S. (2004), A systems approach to evaluating rail life, Manchester Metropolitan

University, Rail Technology Unit, London.
19. Iwnicki S.(2002), Vehicle Dynamics and the Wheel/Rail Interface, Manchester
Metropolitan University, Rail Technology Unit, London.
20.Hudson W.R. et. al (1997), Infrastructure Management: Integrating Design,

Construction, Maintenance, Rehabilitation and Renovation, USA, McGraw-Hill
Professional Publishing.
21.Jendel T. (2002), Prediction of wheel profile wear comparisons with field

measurements, Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden, Wear 253.2,p.89-99
22.Kumar S. (2008), Reliability Analysis and Cost Modeling of Degrading Systems, Division
of Operation and Maintenance Engineering, Lule University of Technology, Sweden,
ISSN: 1402-1544, pp. 7-17.
23.Kumar U., and Aktersten, P. A. (2007), Availability and Maintainability, Risk

Encyclopaedia.
24. London Underground (2009), Transport for London Investment Programe, Transport
for London.
25. Lounis Z.et al. (1999), Decision-Support System for Service Life Asset Management: The
BELCAM Project, Proc. of 8th International Conference on Durability of Building
Materials and Components, Vancouver, 30 May - 3 June, Vol. 2, pp. 1223-1234.
26. Madanat S. (1993), Incorporating inspection decisions in pavement management,

Transportation Research - Part B, 27B ( 6), 425-438.
27.Magel E., and Sroba P. (2007), Rail Grinding Practices, International Heavy Haul
Association (IHHA), Kiruna, Sweden.
28.Neuman W. L. (2003), Social Research Method, USA, 5 editions Optimizer+ (2007) Tool
for optimizing RAMS and maintenance costs, Available Online:
http://www.maintcontrol.com/mc/engels/index.html, Access date: 10/05/2011.
29.Patra A. (2007), RAMS and LCC in Rail Track Maintenance, Division of Operation and
Maintenance Engineering, Lule University of Technology, Sweden, ISSN: 1402-1757, pp.
37-71.
REFERENCES
30.Profillidis, V.A. (2006), Railway Management and Engineering, Third Edition, Ashgate.
ISBN: 0-7546-4854-0.
31.Putallaz Y. (2003), Strategic M&R policy of a railway corridor taking into account the
value of capacity, Proc. World Congress on Railway Research, UK.
32.Putallaz Y. (2007), Gestion stratgique de la maintenance et de la capacit d'un rseau

ferr , Thse a la la facult de l'environnement naturel, architectural et construit,
Laboratoire d'intermodalit des transports et de planification, Section de gnie civil
Lausanne.
33.Railway Technical Web Pages - www.railway-technical.com
34. Sullivan T.J. (2001), Methods of Social Research, Harcourt, Inc., USA, ISBN0-15-507463-
35. Sumser J.R. (2000), A Guide to Empirical Research in Communication, Sage Publications
Inc, ISBN: 0761922229.
36.Thommen J.P. (1991), Economie dentreprise axe sur la gestion, vol. 98 des
publications de la Chambre fiduciaire, Zurich.
37. Zarembski A.M. (1998), Development and Implementation of Integrated Maintenance

Planning Systems, Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting 1998, Washington
D.C.
38.Zoeteman A. (2006), Asset maintenance management: State of the art in the European
railways, International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, Vol. 2, No. 2-3, pp 171-186,
ISSN: 1475-3219.
39.Zoeteman, A. (2001), Life cycle cost analysis for managing rail infrastructure, Concept of
a decision support system for railway design and maintenance, EJTIR, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp.
391 413.

APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1
Bakerloo defective 10 year data
At
RecordI DateFoun DiscoveryMetho FailureTyp Original
LocationFrom LocationTo Road Joint Rail Type
D d d e Section
Weld
VB0698 12/3/1999 Kilburn Park Maida Vale SB Y Jointed Visual Broken BH
UB0199 9/4/1999 Lambeth North Lambeth North NB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB0299 10/4/1999 Paddington Warwick Avenue NB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB0199 25/4/1999 Regent's Park Baker Street NB N Jointed Visual Defective BH
VB0299 20/6/1999 Paddington Warwick Avenue NB N Jointed Visual Broken BH
UB0399 23/9/1999 Lambeth North Waterloo NB Y Stock Ult Defective FB 113A
UB0599 23/9/1999 Piccadilly Circus Charing Cross SB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB0699 6/1/2000 Piccadilly Circus Oxford Circus NB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB0799 25/3/2000 Charing Cross Piccadilly Circus NB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB0899 30/3/2000 Baker Street Marylebone NB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB0999 30/3/2000 Baker Street Marylebone NB Y Stock Ult Defective BH
UB00100 13/7/2000 Piccadilly Circus Charing Cross SB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00200 15/7/2000 Kilburn Park Queen's Park NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00300 15/7/2000 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00400 15/7/2000 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB N Not known Ult Defective BH
UB00500 15/7/2000 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB N Splice Ult Defective BH

APPENDICES
UB00600 15/7/2000 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB N Splice Ult Defective BH
UB00700 21/7/2000 Queen's Park Queen's Park NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00800 21/7/2000 Queen's Park Queen's Park NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00900 26/1/2001 Lambeth North Lambeth North NB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB01000 1/2/2001 Kilburn Maida Vale SB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00101 10/4/2001 Baker Street Regent's Park SB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00101 29/4/2001 Oxford Circus Piccadilly Circus SB N Wing Visual Defective FB 113A
VB00201 5/5/2001 Warwick Avenue Paddington SB Y Jointed Visual Broken BH
VB00301 9/5/2001 Paddington Paddington NB W Transition Visual Broken BH
UB00201 10/7/2001 Edgware Road Baker Street SB N Not known Ult Defective BH
UB00301 12/7/2001 Kilburn Park Queen's Park NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00401 12/7/2001 Kensal Green NRN Queen's Park SB J Not known Ult Defective BH
UB00501 7/10/2001 Regent's Park Baker Street NB Y LWR Ult Defective BH
UB00601 7/10/2001 Regent's Park Oxford Circus SB Y LWR Ult Defective BH
UB00701 7/10/2001 Baker Street Regent's Park SB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00801 3/11/2001 Queen's Park <Not Known> SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00701 31/12/2001 Baker Street Regent's Park SB N Point Visual Defective BH
VB00801 6/1/2002 Piccadilly Circus Oxford Circus NB N Wing Visual Defective FB 109
UB00901 10/1/2002 Queen's Park Kensal Green NRN NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH

APPENDICES
Elephant & Castle

UB01001 12/3/2002 Lambeth North SB N Jointed Ult Defective FB 113A
Overrun
Elephant & Castle
UB01101 12/3/2002 Lambeth North SB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
Overrun
UB01201 13/3/2002 Embankment Embankment NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00102 6/6/2002 Baker Street Marylebone NB Y Jointed Visual Broken BH
VB00202 7/10/2002 Kilburn Park Queen's Park NB N Jointed Visual Defective BH
VB00302 6/12/2002 Charing Cross Platform NB N CWR Visual Defective BH
UB00102 9/1/2003 Marylebone Baker Street SB Y LWR Ult Defective BH
VB00103 7/5/2003 Oxford Circus Regent's Park NB J Jointed Visual Broken BH
UB00103 2/9/2003 Lambeth North Lambeth North SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00203 21/9/2003 Piccadilly Circus Charing Cross SB Y LWR Visual Defective BH
UB00203 18/11/2003 Oxford Circus Piccadilly Circus SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00303 18/11/2003 Baker Street Oxford Circus SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00303 25/11/2003 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB N Jointed Visual Defective BH
UB00403 30/1/2004 Regent's Park Oxford Circus SB Y Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00503 30/1/2004 Regent's Park Baker Street NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00403 4/2/2004 Maida Vale Kilburn Park NB N LWR Visual Defective BH
VB00204 6/8/2004 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB N Wing Visual Defective BH
VB00104 9/8/2004 Baker Street Regent's Park SB N Wing Visual Defective BH
UB00104 22/8/2004 Regent's Park Platform SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH

APPENDICES
VB00304 4/11/2004 Baker Street Marylebone NB J Jointed Visual Broken BH
VB00404 18/11/2004 Baker Street Marylebone NB J Jointed Visual Defective BH

Elephant & Castle
VB00504 7/12/2004 Lambeth North NB N Switch Visual Broken FB
Overrun
VB00604 15/2/2005 Queen's Park Depot Queen's Park Depot NB N Wing Visual Broken BH
UB00204 23/2/2005 Edgware Road Marylebone SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00105 15/4/2005 Waterloo Embankment NB W LWR Visual Broken FB
UB00105 12/5/2005 Baker Street Regent's Park SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00405 15/5/2005 Waterloo Lambeth North SB J LWR Ult Defective FB
VB00205 15/5/2005 Warwick Avenue Paddington SB N Point Visual Defective BH

Elephant & Castle
UB00505 17/5/2005 Lambeth North NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
Overrun
Elephant & Castle
Overrun
Elephant & Castle
Overrun
VB00405 27/10/2005 Warwick Avenue Maida Vale NB N CWR Visual Defective FB
VB00705 13/11/2005 Baker Street Regent's Park SB N Jointed Visual Defective BH
VB00505 17/11/2005 Paddington Edgware Road SB W LWR Visual Defective FB
VB00605 18/11/2005 Embankment Waterloo SB W Jointed Visual Broken FB
UB00805 8/12/2005 Lambeth North Waterloo NB J Jointed Ult Defective FB

APPENDICES
UB00905 9/12/2005 Waterloo Embankment NB N Jointed Ult Defective FB
UB01005 9/12/2005 Charing Cross Platform SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB01105 9/12/2005 Charing Cross Piccadilly Circus NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH

Elephant & Castle
Overrun
UB01305 12/1/2006 Warwick Avenue Paddington SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB01405 13/1/2006 Queen's Park Platform NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB01505 13/1/2006 Queen's Park Platform NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB01605 14/1/2006 Kilburn Park Maida Vale SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB01805 17/1/2006 Kilburn Park Maida Vale SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB02005 21/1/2006 Maida Vale Platform SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB02105 21/1/2006 Maida Vale Kilburn Park NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB30005 21/2/2006 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB N LWR Ult Defective BH
UB30105 25/2/2006 Warwick Avenue Maida Vale NB N CWR Ult Defective BH
UB02305 2/3/2006 Embankment Waterloo SB J Jointed Ult Defective FB
UB02405 4/3/2006 Paddington Edgware Road SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00206 12/5/2006 Regent's Park Baker Street NB N CWR Visual Broken FB

APPENDICES
UB00106 1/6/2006 Charing Cross Embankment SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00206 7/6/2006 Marylebone Platform NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00306 8/6/2006 Baker Street Platform NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00406 9/6/2006 Paddington Platform 4 SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00506 9/6/2006 Paddington Platform 4 SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00306 14/7/2006 Elephant & Castle Lambeth North NB N Jointed Visual Broken BH
UB30106 25/10/2006 Edgware Road Platform SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB30206 25/10/2006 Regent's Park Oxford Circus SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00406 3/11/2006 Embankment Waterloo SB N Jointed Visual Broken BH
UB30406 7/11/2006 Edgware Road Marylebone SB N CWR Ult Defective BH

<Not <Not
UB0606 16/11/2006 Charing Cross Piccadilly Circus NB - Visual Defective
known> known>
UB30606 16/11/2006 Charing Cross Piccadilly Circus NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB30706 17/11/2006 Paddington Edgware Road SB N LWR Ult Defective FB
UB31006 5/1/2007 Lambeth North Waterloo NB N LWR Ult Defective BH
UB31106 5/1/2007 Lambeth North Waterloo NB J Jointed Ult Defective FB
UB31206 5/1/2007 Waterloo Lambeth North SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH

APPENDICES
UB31306 10/1/2007 Baker Street Regent's Park SB N LWR Ult Defective BH
UB31406 11/1/2007 Paddington Edgware Road SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB31506 20/1/2007 Kilburn Park Queen's Park NB N CWR Ult Defective FB
UB31606 22/1/2007 Lambeth North Lambeth North SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB31706 20/3/2007 Waterloo Lambeth North SB J LWR Ult Defective BH
UB31806 23/3/2007 Paddington Edgware Road SB J CWR Ult Defective FB
UB31906 28/3/2007 Baker Street Marylebone SB J Wing Ult Defective BH
UB32006 28/3/2007 Marylebone Baker Street SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00107 5/4/2007 Elephant & Castle Lambeth North NB N CWR Ult Defective BH
UB00207 5/4/2007 Elephant & Castle Lambeth North NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00107 16/4/2007 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB N Point Visual Defective BH
VB00207 16/4/2007 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB N Wing Visual Defective BH
UB00307 18/4/2007 Charing Cross Piccadilly Circus NB N CWR Ult Defective FB
UB00407 18/4/2007 Piccadilly Circus Charing Cross NB N CWR Ult Defective FB
UB00507 20/4/2007 Warwick Avenue Paddington SB N LWR Ult Defective BH
UB00607 20/4/2007 Paddington Warwick Avenue NB N LWR Ult Defective BH

Sidin
UB00707 26/4/2007 Queen's Park Platform3 J Jointed Ult Defective BH
g
VB00307 1/5/2007 Lambeth North Waterloo NB N Wing Visual Defective BH

APPENDICES
VB00407 28/6/2007 Charing Cross Piccadilly Circus NB N LWR Visual Defective FB
UB00807 24/8/2007 Waterloo Lambeth North SB N LWR Ult Defective FB
UB00907 25/8/2007 Embankment Waterloo SB N LWR Ult Defective FB
UB01007 25/8/2007 Waterloo Platform SB N CWR Ult Defective FB
UB01107 31/8/2007 Paddington Warwick Avenue NB N CWR Ult Defective BH
UB01207 7/9/2007 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB01307 27/10/2007 Lambeth North Waterloo NB J Stock Ult Defective FB
UB01407 27/10/2007 Lambeth North Waterloo NB J Stock Ult Defective FB
UB01507 3/11/2007 Embankment Platform5 NB J LWR Ult Defective BH
UB01607 3/11/2007 Embankment Platform5 NB J LWR Ult Defective BH
UB01707 23/11/2007 Paddington Edgware Road SB J LWR Ult Defective FB
UB01807 23/11/2007 Edgware Road Edgware Road SB J LWR Ult Defective BH
UB01907 26/11/2007 Paddington Edgware Road SB N LWR Ult Defective FB
UB02007 28/11/2007 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB02107 28/11/2007 Kilburn Park Queen's Park SB N LWR Ult Defective BH

Sidin LH Wing
VB00507 13/12/2007 Queen's Park Queen's Park N Visual Defective BH
g Rail

APPENDICES
UB02507 11/1/2008 Elephant & Castle Elephant & Castle SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB02907 11/1/2008 Elephant & Castle Elephant & Castle SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB03007 12/1/2008 Elephant & Castle Elephant & Castle NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB03207 12/1/2008 Elephant & Castle Elephant & Castle NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB03307 18/1/2008 Elephant & Castle Platform3 NB N LWR Ult Defective FB
UB03407 18/1/2008 Elephant & Castle Platform4 SB N LWR Ult Defective FB
UB03707 25/1/2008 Oxford Circus Piccadilly Circus SB N LWR Ult Defective FB
UB04107 1/2/2008 Baker Street Platform1 NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB04207 22/2/2008 Queen's Park Platform2 SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB04307 22/2/2008 Queen's Park Platform2 SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH

APPENDICES
UB00108 11/4/2008 Oxford Circus Regent's Park NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00208 18/4/2008 Baker Street Marylebone NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00308 2/5/2008 Warwick Avenue Paddington SB N LWR Ult Defective BH
UB00408 7/5/2008 Warwick Avenue Paddington SB J Jointed Ult Broken BH

RH Wing
UB00508 8/5/2008 Kilburn Park Queen's Park NB J Ult Defective FB
Rail
UB00608 20/6/2008 Lambeth North Waterloo NB W LWR Ult Broken BH
UB00708 20/6/2008 Lambeth North Waterloo NB J LWR Ult Defective FB
VB00108 28/6/2008 Baker Street Regent's Park SB J Stock Visual Broken BH
UB01008 11/7/2008 Paddington Edgware Road SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB01108 25/7/2008 Elephant & Castle Elephant & Castle SB N Stock Ult Defective BH
RH Wing
UB01608 25/7/2008 Elephant & Castle Elephant & Castle SB N Ult Defective BH
Rail
LH Wing
UB01708 25/7/2008 Elephant & Castle Elephant & Castle SB N Ult Defective BH
Rail

APPENDICES
UB01908 5/9/2008 Paddington Edgware Road SB N LWR Ult Defective BH
UB02008 19/9/2008 Paddington Platform NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB02108 29/9/2008 Marylebone Platform NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB02208 29/9/2008 Marylebone Edgware Road NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB02308 29/9/2008 Marylebone Edgware Road NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB02408 24/10/2008 Waterloo Embankment NB J LWR Ult Defective BH
UB02508 21/11/2008 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB02608 19/12/2008 Baker Street Marylebone NB N Jointed Ult Broken BH
UB02708 23/1/2009 Edgware Road Marylebone SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00508 23/1/2009 Piccadilly Circus Oxford Circus NB J Jointed Visual Broken BH
UB02808 13/2/2009 Maida Vale Warwick Avenue SB N LWR Ult Defective BH
UB02908 13/2/2009 Maida Vale Kilburn Park NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB03108 13/3/2009 Paddington Edgware Road SB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB03208 13/3/2009 Regent's Park Oxford Circus SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH

APPENDICES
UB00209 10/4/2009 Regent's Park Platform SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00309 2/5/2009 Baker Street Platform NB N Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00409 22/5/2009 Baker Street Marylebone NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00509 29/5/2009 Edgware Road Paddington NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00609 12/6/2009 Queen's Park Kilburn Park NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00709 3/7/2009 Regent's Park Platform2 SB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB00909 10/7/2009 Lambeth North Waterloo NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB01009 10/7/2009 Embankment Waterloo SB N Jointed Ult Defective FB

Crossing
VB00109 19/7/2009 Lambeth North Waterloo NB N Visual Defective FB
Nose
VB00209 13/8/2009 Regent's Park Baker Street NB N Jointed Visual Defective BH
UB01109 14/8/2009 Queen's Park Kilburn Park SB J Jointed Ult Broken BH
VB00309 27/9/2009 Embankment Waterloo SB N LWR Visual Broken FB
VB00409 16/10/2009 Paddington Edgware Road SB N Jointed Visual Defective BH
UB01309 23/10/2009 Maida Vale Platform1 NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
UB01409 6/11/2009 Elephant & Castle Lambeth North NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH
VB00509 17/11/2009 Edgware Road Paddington NB N Jointed Visual Broken BH
UB01509 20/11/2009 Piccadilly Circus Platform1 NB J Jointed Ult Defective BH

APPENDICES
VB00609 23/11/2009 Lambeth North Elephant & Castle SB J Jointed Visual Defective FB
VB00709 2/1/2010 Oxford Circus Regent's Park NB N LWR Visual Broken BH
Rail type
1.Jointed : Jointed track is made using lengths of rail, usually around 20 m (66 ft) long (in the UK) and 39 or 78 feet (11.9 or 23.8 m) long (in
North America), bolted together using perforated steel plates known as fishplates (UK) or joint bars (North America). Because of the small
gaps left between the rails, when trains pass over jointed tracks they make a "clickety-clack" sound. Unless it is well-maintained, jointed
track does not have the ride quality of welded rail and is less desirable for high speed trains. However, jointed track is still used in many
countries on lower speed lines and sidings, and is used extensively in poorer countries due to the lower construction cost and the simpler
equipment required for its installation and maintenance. A major problem of jointed track is cracking around the bolt holes, which can lead
to the rail head (the running surface) breaking. This was the cause of the Hither Green rail crash which caused British Railways to begin
converting much of its track to Continuous Welded Rail.
2.Continuous Welded Rail: Most modern railways use continuous welded rail (CWR), sometimes referred to as ribbon rails. In this form of track, the rails
are welded together by utilising flash butt welding to form one continuous rail that may be several kilometres long, or thermite welding to repair or
splice together existing CWR segments. Because there are few joints, this form of track is very strong, gives a smooth ride, and needs less maintenance;
trains can travel on it at higher speeds and with less friction. Welded rails are more expensive to lay than jointed tracks, but have much lower
maintenance costs. The first welded track was used in Germany in 1924 and the US in 1930[3] and has become common on main lines since the 1950s.
3.Long Welded Rail: The term 'long welded' is used to denote rails of around a quarter of a mile long that are fabricated at the manufacturing
workshop, and reserve 'continuous welded' for the final job
4.Wing: The wing rails are the short lengths of running rail with bent extensions which lie alongside the nose of the crossing vee.
5.Transition: Forged and welded transition rails are used to connect tracks with different rail sections.
6.Stockrail: The fixed rail in a track, against which the switch rail operates.
7.Point: is the piece from which the actual tip of the crossing nose is formed

APPENDICES
Discovery Method
1.Visual: The primary and the most easily applied method for detecting and evaluating defects. However, there are cases where other
methods are required to show the severity of the visual defect. (British Railway Track sel 165)
2.Ultrasonic Method: The ultrasound (sound at a frequency higher than that detectable by the human ear) examination of rails for internal
defects is carried out on a regular basis by pedestrian operators or a rail borne ultrasonic test unit.
Original Section
1.BH (Bullhead Rail): Rail, most commonly used in the United Kingdom, with a head and foot nearly equal in cross-section, that is supported in cast iron
chairs and secured by wedges. Bullhead rail is similar to double-headed rail but with a heavier profile to the top edge. It became the standard for the
British railway system until the mid-20th century but has now been largely replaced by flat-bottom rail. Bullhead rail is still used on the London
Underground and survives on the national rail system in some sidings.
2.FB 109: Flat Bottom rail 109lb/yard
3.FB 113A: Flat bottom rail 113lb/yard

MGMT of Railway Infra

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

MGMT of Railway Infra

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Master CIMO Transport et Mobilit

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF MAINTENANCE OF A

Memoire de stage London Underground

I am also very grateful to my colleagues and my in-house supervisor in Transport for

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF A RAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM 2

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF A RAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM 3

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF A RAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM 4

Figure 1.1: EU27 - Performance by mode in freight transport 1995-2007

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF A RAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM 5

1.1European Policy Framework .......................................................................................................... 2

1.2 Research Problem ......................................................................................................................... 4

1.3 Objectives of research .................................................................................................................. 5

1.4 Research Questions ...................................................................................................................... 5

1.5 Scope and Delimitations ............................................................................................................... 5

1.6 Structure of the Thesis .................................................................................................................. 6

2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................... 8

2.1 Research purpose ................................................................................................................... 8

2.2 Research Approach ................................................................................................................. 8

2.3 Data Collection ........................................................................................................................ 9

2.4 Data Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 10

2.5 Reliability and Validity........................................................................................................... 10

3. STRATEGIC PLANNING OF A RAILWAY SYSTEM .................................................................... 11

3.1 Presentation of a system ...................................................................................................... 11

3.1.1 Systems environment .......................................................................................................... 12

3.2 Representation of a railway infrastructure system .................................................................... 13

3.2.1 The presentation of a mobility system ................................................................................. 13

3.2.2 The presentation of railway infrastructure system .............................................................. 14

3.3 Tactical and strategic planning of a system ................................................................................ 16

3.4 Performance measures related to the operation of a system.................................................... 17

3.4.1 RAMS Analysis for Railway Track ......................................................................................... 17

3.4.2 Factors Affecting RAMS........................................................................................................ 18

3.4.3 Maintaining performance and system conditions ............................................................... 20

3.4.4 Life Cycle Analysis................................................................................................................. 22

4. WEAR MODEL DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................ 23

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF A RAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM 6

4.1.1 Modelling the Bakerloo line ................................................................................................. 25

4.2 Rail Wear ..................................................................................................................................... 26

4.3 Technical degradation factors causing rail wear ........................................................................ 27

4.3.1 The effect of track quality (geometric characteristics) ........................................................ 27

4.3.1.1Rail wear on sharp curves .................................................................................................. 28

4.3.1.2 Rail wear on high rails ....................................................................................................... 29

4.3.1.3 Flat bottom or Bull head rail cross sections ...................................................................... 30

4.3.2 The effect of train services ................................................................................................... 31

4.3.2.1 Train speed ........................................................................................................................ 31

4.3.2.2 Utilisation of network ....................................................................................................... 32

4.3.3 The effect of Vehicle Characteristics .................................................................................... 33

4.4 Maintenance and renewal activities ........................................................................................... 36

4.4.1 Inspection of Rail Wear ........................................................................................................ 37

5.DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTEGRATED MODEL FOR ESTIMATION OF EXPECTED MAINTENANCE

5.1 Life Cycle Cost (LCC) theory ........................................................................................................ 40

5.1.1 LCC in Railways: the Zoeteman model ................................................................................. 41

3.2 5.2 Main obstacles to LCC implementation on Railways ...................................................... 42

5.3 Approach to Track Maintenance Cost Model in Bakerloo line ................................................... 43

5.4 Cost Modelling in London Underground..................................................................................... 44

5.4.1 Track Maintenance Cost - Track Lifespan ............................................................................ 45

5.4.2 Track Maintenance Point Ends Lifespan ........................................................................... 47

5.5 Cost Estimation in Maintenance Phase ...................................................................................... 50

6. TRACK MAINTENANCE PLANNING........................................................................................... 52

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF A RAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM 7

6.1 Evaluation of maintenance needs State of the art .................................................................. 53

6.1.1 Framework for analysing the short terms needs ................................................................. 53

6.1.2 Framework for analyzing the long term performance ......................................................... 54

6.2 Maintenance Optimisation ......................................................................................................... 55