INTERNATIONAL UNION OF RAILWAYS HIGH SPEED DEPARTMENT

DESIGN OF NEW LINES FOR SPEEDS OF 300 – 350 KM/H STATE OF THE ART

FIRST REPORT

VERSION DATED 25 OCTOBER 2001

CONTENTS 1. PRELIMINARY REMARKS 2. SCOPE OF THE DOCUMENT 3. GEOMETRIC PARAMETERS OF THE LINE 4. CARACTERISTICS OF THE TRANSVERSE SECTION AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE 5. PARAMETERS RELATING TO TRACK EQUIPMENT 6. LAYING THE TRACK 7. ELECTRIFICATION, SIGNALLING, TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND OTHER LINE EQUIPMENT 8. OPERATING CONDITIONS 9. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDICES : 1 – PROPOSAL FOR SUBJECTS TO BE STUDIED IN DUE COURSE 2 – BIBLIOGRAPHY 3 –MEMBERS OF THE WORKING GROUP

2/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

1 – PRELIMINARY REMARKS The construction of new high speed railway lines is currently being undertaken in a large number of countries, in particular on the continent of Europe. There are now more than 2 900 km open for commercial service in Europe (and more than 2 000 km under construction) as well as almost 2 200 km in Japan. The development of these new lines has been done over a period of more than forty years, between the middle of the 1950s and the current decade. During this period the design criteria have been modified as experience has been gained with the different aspects of high speed running. In particular, the geometric parameters of the route chosen in the new infrastructure projects for a certain design speed, in fact, permit higher maximum speeds than those specified when the line was opened (which were chosen depending on the technical, commercial and economic criteria) Experience shows that the design engineers like to keep a certain « reserve of speed » for the future. The different life expectancy of the infrastructure and rolling stock suggests that this reserve should be respected but competition obliges it to be reduced. Figure 1 shows the increase of maximum speeds in experimental test runs and in commercial service during the last few decades. Figure 2 gives the total number of kilometres of test runs done by SNCF, in the range of speeds between 400 and 515 km/h.

3/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

km run 2000

CUMULATIVE NUMBER OF RUNS AT VERY HIGH SPEED (SNCF)

Figure 2

44 runs at V > 450 km/h 1500 9 runs at V> 500 km/h

1000

? ? ? ?

Tests Tests Tests Tests

TGV 140 V2 TGV 17 TGV 88

500

Speed 0 400 420 440 460 480 500 515

km /h 600

INCREASE IN MAXIMUM SPEED

Figure 1

500 V m experim ax. ental

400

300

200

V m in com ercial service ax. m 100

0
19 50 19 52 19 54 19 56 19 58 19 60 19 62 19 64 19 66 19 68 19 70 19 72 19 74 19 76 19 78 19 80 19 82 19 84 19 86 19 88 19 90 19 92 19 94 19 96 19 98 20 00

FIGURES 1 AND 2
4/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

The current standardisation processes may result in a reduction, or even the disappearance of this speed reserve. From the point of view of commercial operation, the experience available is situated in the range from 250 to 300 km/h. However, some lines have been type tested for speeds of more than 300 km/h (up to 320 km/h). It must, however, be admitted that in general, economic considerations (either to do with commercial or power supply matters etc.), technical (or relating to rolling stock or fixed installations) or to do with the protection of the environment (route, noise, etc.) have limited the speed in question. Looking ahead, it is necessary to report that the present situation will change for certain routes and for certain types of service. On the European level, it is foreseeable that this will be checked, for the first time with the specification of the new TGV Mediterranean lines (it has been decided to operate a section of some 60 kilometres of this line at 320 km/h) and the Madrid - Barcelona line. In the second of these, over a distance of 625 km (approximately) and for a journey time that the train timing studies have put between 2 ¼ hours and 2 1/2 hours (direct services), the average commercial speed will be between 250 and 278 km/h. In view of the speed restrictions which are imposed at the approaches to large towns, a running speed in excess of 300 km/h seems to be essential. 320 km/h, and if necessary 350 km/h will, therefore, be the reference level for this new railway line. This fact and the possibility that certain new lines which are planned in Spain will authorise this same level of performance, led the organisation « Management of the railway Infrastructure » (GIF), which is responsible for introducing them, to ask the UIC General Management, in March 1998 to carry out a study to prepare recommendations for the characteristics of railway lines that can be operated at a maximum speed of up to 350 km/h. On 26 May 1998, the Director General of UIC wrote to the railways and organisations responsible for infrastructure where high speeds are allowed to invite them to nominate representatives to form a Working Group which under the co-ordination of the High Speed Department of
5/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

UIC, would carry out the necessary analyses and, if necessary, prepare some draft recommendations. The Working Group in question has, therefore, been set up and includes representatives of DB AG, GIF, FS SpA, RENFE, RFF, SNCB and SNCF working with the High Speed Department of UIC. This document summarises the principal conclusions of this Working Group.

6/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

2 - SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT The preliminary analyses of the Working Group soon showed that it was difficult for a single group of experts to deal with all the questions relating to both fixed installations and rolling stock. It was also found that UIC had already done research into various specific fields aimed at solving problems which were within the scope of this Working Group. In parallel to this, Technical Specifications for Interoperability (STIs) are being prepared, that affect the sub-systems of the infrastructure, the power supply, maintenance, control-command, rolling stock and operations. Also various European Standards (CEN, CENELEC, etc.) and others outside Europe (FRA concerning safety, Japan, etc.) also cover some aspects of our objective. It has, therefore, been decided to start by making a summary of the criteria at present available in certain countries, even if they have still not acquired the status of standards. It will now be possible, from information given in this document, to deal in a longer timescale with more specific questions or even to analyse in more depth certain aspects or single parameters, with a view to preparing the recommendations requested by the General Management of UIC. The Working Group aims to highlight the main problems which are raised by the increase of speed beyond 300 km/h, without, however, recommending mandatory solutions.

7/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

3 - GEOMETRICAL PARAMETERS OF THE LINE
The contribution of the experts of the Working Group has enabled Table 1 to be prepared, where the orders of magnitude to be observed have been summarised for each of the parameters that need to be taken into consideration within the speed range of 250 to 350 km/h.

8/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

TABLE 1

TYPES OF LINE, PARAMETERS OF THE ROUTE AND THE GEOMETRY OF THE TRACK
COUNTRY (km/h) France 300 350 17 None None 300 17 None None 350 320 6 250 exc. (5 556) 180 35 STI (Draft) Germany 300 (1) 300 (2) 350 (3) 17 20 22.5 17 None None < 16 None None 350 330 5 120 170 40 Italy 300 17 22.5 22.5 250 300 300 5 450 105 12 (6) 350 (3) 17 22.5 22.5 350 350 7 000 130 12 (6) Spain 300 17 22.5 None 270 270 (300) 4 000 150 12.5 350 18 22.5 None 350 > 300 6 500 150 25 Belgium 300 17 22.5 22.5 320 300 4 800 150 350 17 None None > 300 None Defined by I 200

PARAMETER Type of traffic Maximum axle load for the maximum line speed, high speed trainsets (t) Maximum axle load for locomotives (t) Maximum axle load for freight wagons (7) (t) Maximum design speed of the lines (km/h)

PASSENGER PASSENGER PASSENGER PASSENGER PASSENGER PASSENGER PASSENGER PASSENGER PASSENGER PASSENGER PASSENGER /FREIGHT /FREIGHT /FREIGHT

Maximum operating 300 speed of the lines (km/h) Minimum radius of 4 000 curvature for the maximum speed (m) Maximum cant of the rack 180 (mm) Maximum gradient 35 (mm/m)

300 300 (tunnels (tunnels 330) 330) 300 300 4 000 160 20 3 350 (4) 170 40

15 - 21 35 (for (6) lengths < 6 km)

Law of variation of the cant of the track (mm/s) Minimum vertical radius (m) Cant deficiency at the design speed (mm)

50

50 (5)

34.7

34.7

34.7

27

37

32

30

37 + 20 000 - 17 000 100

(Comfort) not specified)

16 000 21 000 14 000 14 000 20 000 25 000 25 000 24 000 25 000 (17 000) 12 000 12 000 85 65 (85) 105 130
ballaste d track

112

90

75

100

65

80 (8)

150
non ballaste d track

Length of the transition 300 350 384 408 476 330 330 curves which correspond to the minimum radius (m) NOTES: (1) Nuremberg Ingolstadt (2) Cologne - Frankfurt (3) Hypothesis (4) This could be reduced down to 3 250 m with cant of 180 mm and cant deficiency of 150 mm

360

460

420

(Comfort)

10/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

The analysis of the data in Table 1 shows that the operation of the lines varies from one country to another. As far as traffic is concerned the lines can be divided into three types : Type 1 : Exclusively high speed traffic. This is the case in France and Belgium (these are for « main line », « Regional » etc. types of traffic), and in the future, for certain other lines, in Germany (CologneFrankfurt), etc. Type 2 : High speed passenger traffic, with conventional passenger trains at lower speeds. In this group there is Spain and some future lines in Belgium and Holland. Type 3 : Mixed passenger traffic (high speed and conventional) and freight. This is the case in Italy and Germany, as well as future lines in Spain, in France and in England. In Germany, the reference speed for the new lines under construction is 300 km/h. The new Cologne-Frankfurt line is in type 1, while the other existing lines are in type 3. Initially, in Germany, the reference speed was 250 km/h for high speed trainsets and 80 km/h for freight trains. These speeds have been increased to 280 km/h and 120 km/h respectively in the last few years. The decision on the type of traffic is very important, for it has immediate and basic consequences for the route of the track, the maximum permissible axle loads, the conditions and the equipment for operation and maintenance. The co-existence of freight traffic and trains with speeds higher than 300 km/h can pose capacity problems, but also involve serious constraints of the geometry because of the limitation of cant deficiency. For all these reasons, running at speeds higher than 300 km/h should be restricted, in principle, to type 1 and 2 lines. This initial finding affects the comparative analysis of the parameters of the line. Such is the case with the maximum gradient, where there is a very large margin of variation, between 12.5 and 40 ‰, which clearly shows that it is impossible to fix a recommended value, because the traffic and the hills of the region that a new line passes through may play a major role in the decisions taken. It is interesting to recall that the proposed STI for the infrastructure specifies a maximum gradient of 35 ‰ over a continuous length not

exceeding 6 km ; to which the condition is added that the average gradient should not exceed 25 ‰ on 10 km. On the basis of the information supplied by SNCF, Table 2 gives the geometrical parameters affected by the increase in speed.

12/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

TABLE 2

EFFECT OF THE SPEED ON THE SELECTION OF THE GEOMETRIC PARAMETERS OF THE LINE
SPEED (km/h) 270

PARAMETER (from data given by SNCF)

300 4 545 4 000 4 000 180 180 85 100 100 110 30 50 R = 4 000 m D = 180 mm L = 300 m 0.30 < i < 0.60 0.60 < i < 0.72

350 7 143 6 250 5 556 180 180 65 85 30 50 R = 5 556 m D = 180 mm L = 350 m 0.30 < i < 0.52 0.52 < i < 0.62

Minimum radius of curvature (m) : - Recommended 3 846 - Normal 3 226 - Exceptional 3 125 Maximum cant (mm) : - Normal 180 - Exceptional 180 Cant deficiency (mm) : - Normal 100 - Exceptional 130 Excess of cant in normal conditions experienced by freight trains (mm) : - Normal - Exceptional Speed of variation of the cant deficiency (mm/s) : - Normal - Exceptional Length of the parabolic connections (m) Variation of cant (mm/m) : - Normal - Exceptional 100 110 30 50 R = 3 125 m D = 180 mm L = 270 m 0.30 < i < 0.67 0.67 < i < 0.80

It should be mentioned that when considering the route in plan view, the increase of speed from 300 to 350 km/h assumes the application of the recommended minimum radius of 7 143 m, compared with the 4 545 m necessary for 300 km/h. This is a difference of almost 2 600 m. The new line being built between Madrid and Barcelona has a recommended minimum radius of 7 250 m and an absolute minimum radius of 6 615 m. Finally, once the criteria for the maximum speed have been fixed, the parameter essential to determine the other geometric characteristics is the cant deficiency (in the absence of considerations that are sufficiently validated for the use of speeds greater than 300 km/h for vehicles fitted with tilting suspension systems). In this respect, it is possible to see a tendency to reduce the value of the cant deficiency as the speed increases. However, it is conceivable, in principle, to design tilting trains in the future for speeds above 300 km/h which could operate on the high speed lines with larger cant deficiencies than are allowed for conventional high speed trains. It would, therefore, be interesting to consider two questions in detail : 1 - What would be the characteristics of a high speed line for 350 km/h designed for operation with tilting trains. 2 - What should be the technical characteristics of high speed tilting trains. The importance of these considerations comes from the fact that the construction of lines with low radii in plan is less expensive as far as the civil engineering structures are concerned, especially when the line is built in the context of a very limiting topographical system.

4 - CHARACTERISTICS OF THE TRANSVERSE SECTION AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE The typical transverse sections of each railway are given in Figure 3. It can be seen that the most significant parameters from the point of view of the increase in speed are the distance between the track centre lines, the cross sectional area of the tunnels and the position of the walkways for the maintenance staff.
L L = (half) width of sub grade E = (half) distance between track centre lines D= safety distance P = Walkway (work zone)

E

D P

I RAI L

I RAI L

X X X X

CANIVEA U AXIS OF THE TRACK WORK ZONE AXIS OF THE PLATFORM CATENARY SUPPORT TRACK GAUGE: INTERIOR : 1 437 mm EXTERIOR : 1 600 mm CENTRE : 1 509 mm

COMPARISON OF THE CROSS SECTIONS OF HIGH SPEED LINES 15/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

RAILWAY SPEED (km/h) DISTANCE BETWEEN TRACK CENTRE LINES (m) L (m) E (m) D (m) P (m)

SNCF 300 4.5

SNCF 350 5

DB AG 300 4.5

FS 300 5

GIF 350 4.7

SNCB 320 4.5

6.95 2.25 2.30 1.40

7.40 2.50 2.50 1.40

6.05 2.25 2.20 8.00

6.80 2.50 2.80 0.70

7.00 2.35 2.95 0.90

6.96 2.25 2.91 0.80

FIGURE 3
The general geometrical characteristics of the new lines enable Table 3 to be compiled.

16/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

TABLE 3

DESIGN CRITERIA FOR SOME INFRASTRUCTURE PARAMETERS
COUNTRY (km/h) STI (Draft) Germany (1) 300 V + 300 F Pass. 4.5 4.5 12.1 12.1 350 Hypoth. 4.7 13.3 Italy 300 5 13.6 350 Hypoth. 5 13.6 (3) Spain 300 4.3 13.3 350 4.7 14 Belgium 320 4.5 13.9 350 4.5 -

PARAMETER Minimum distance between track centre lines (m) Width of subgrade (m)

France 300 4.2 13.9

350 4.5 14.2

Section of tunnels for 70 100 92 (2) 92 (2) 103 (2) 82 100 75 100 150 (4) double track, vehicles sealed or not (m²) Distance from the side of 3.00 3.00 2.21 2.21 2.71 2.15 2.21 2.72 2.75 the service track to the external side of the rail (m) (1) For unballasted track. With ballasted track, d = 0 mm and with d = 160 mm, width increased by 40 cm due to inclination of the ballast to the outside (2) Sealed vehicles (except for freight) (3) To be confirmed by means of tests with a model to check that the STI is met (4) Short covered section

DISTANCE BETWEEN TRACK CENTRE LINES The STI specifies a minimum figure of 4.50 metres for the distance between track centre lines (for speeds greater than 300 km/h). Different railways have adopted figures that are in some cases different, without the reasons being clear in every case. The economic implications can be considerable if the transverse section is increased (regardless of whether this is to increase the distance between track centrelines or for other parts of the cross section). On this subject, the studies carried out for the international section Figueres - Perpignan of the new Barcelona - Perpignan line show that a variation of the distance between track centres of 10 cm around 4.8 m (in free air) represents a mean cost of 0.2 MF (30 300 EURO, 1999) per kilometre of line. If one takes account of the total cost of the infrastructure, an increase of 30 cm in the width of the subgrade (which would enable the distance between track centre lines to be increased from 4.5 m to 4.8 m) would involve an increase in cost of the civil engineering work of 1%. The transverse section of the track must be designed bearing in mind the local peculiarities, such as the drainage of water, access, earthworks replacing noise abatement walls, etc. TUNNELS In the part of the draft Technical Specifications for Interoperability which deals with the infrastructure parameters, it is important to mention that the section of tunnels must meet the criteria for the maximum variations of pressure allowable. For this reason it is specified that tunnels should be designed so that the maximum pressure variation that exists along an interoperable train should not exceed 10 kPa while the train is running through the tunnel at the maximum permitted speed. This restriction is for the case where the sealing system fails and the values are based on considerations of the health of the passengers not on their comfort. In the 2 track tunnels of mixed traffic lines, the running of freight trains raises two problems, the aerodynamic effects and safety in the case of an accident. This is why it is necessary to consider the reduction of speed

of high speed trains in tunnels or to avoid mixed traffic at the same time and to organise the running of freight trains and high speed trains at different times of the day. The lining of tunnels is favourable from the point of view of the aerodynamic effects. Regarding the cost, on the basis of the estimates made, a double track tunnel through the Pyrenees of variable section (75, 85 or 100 m²), would represent an additional cost of 15% and 22% respectively compared to the initial section of 75 m². These figures correspond, of course, to a certain type of terrain and they should only be interpolated to other geological and geotechnical contexts with caution. The question of the safety of trains running inside tunnels must be dealt with by UIC from the point of view of the infrastructure, as well as their suitability for the emergency cases. In view of this, a question to discuss is that of the permissible length for tunnels : the maximum length in double track (it appears that the present trend is to build independent tunnels for reasons of safety, for speeds above 300 km/h with internal connections for two way working, emergency exits (maximum distance between exits, configuration, equipment, internal waiting rooms, etc.), adaptation of all this for the case of mixed traffic (passengers - freight) etc. SAFETY OF MAINTENCE STAFF An extremely important question for the safety of maintenance staff is that of the distance between the internal side of the service track and the external side of the rail. Once again a wide range of criteria were found for the specification of this parameter (see Table 3). The STIs specify that trainsets at 250 km/h shall not cause an unacceptable slipstream on people 2 metres away. For higher speeds, each railway must consider the possibility of introducing additional precautions, such as higher distances, screens, etc.

BRIDGES
19/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

It is proposed to forbid the placing of piers close to points. In addition it seems advisable to provide protection for the columns in underground stations adjacent to high speed lines due to the possibility of derailments. The design of long viaducts must aim (as far as possible) to reduce the number of expansion devices (or even to do away with them completely), which also raises problems for maintenance. DYNAMIC EFFECTS ON BRIDGES After the first high speed lines were taken into service, problems were experienced on certain bridges due to the appearance of defects in the ballast bed which caused destabilisation of the track and the deterioration of its geometry. This implied a certain risk for trains in service. A detailed study of this problem showed that it was associated with vertical accelerations of the deck (of the order of 0.7g to 0.8g), caused by trains running at certain speeds (not necessarily the maximum speeds). The bridges were designed in accordance with the UIC 71 load cases and UIC Leaflet 776-1. The theoretical and experimental analysis of this question showed : a – With vertical accelerations of the order of 0.7g to 0.8g, the ballast tends to be reduced to a liquid and as a result loses its capacity to resist the loads applied on the track. b - The introduction of an elastic mat between the deck and the ballast increased the accelerations in the ballast and, as a result, made this problem worse. c - Accelerations of the order of 1g on decks which do not have ballast (directly laid track) can reduce the Q forces of the wheel-rail contact down to unacceptable limits (even to a wheeel lifting off the rail).

d – The regular and repeated distribution of the wheelsets of high speed trainsets in certain speed ranges can produce resonance situations in the deck, with large amplifications, both in the deflections and in the vertical accelerations.

20/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

e – Among the actual trains that have been used for the definition of the UIC 71 load cases, and the dynamic coefficients to be applied, only train No. 5 (300 km/h turbo train) reached the speed indicated. This train was made up of two vehicles, with a total length of 38.4 metres, and 8 axles each loaded to 170 kN. Modern high speed trainsets can be up to 400 metres long (according to the STIs) and have a total weight of 10 000 kN, with speeds in excess of 300 km/h. As a result it is essential to check, when the civil engineering works are designed, how the railway structures which have to carry the high speed trains will behave. In particular it is necessary to check that : 1 – The vertical acceleration on the track bed of ballasted track will not exceed the value of 0.35g (with a safety factor of 2), in the frequency range below 20 Hz. 2 - The vertical acceleration on the track bed of non-ballasted track will not exceed the value of 0.5g (with a safety factor of 2) in the frequency range below 20 Hz. These checks must be done for the trains specified in the Eurocode. The experience of the railways on this subject should produce new data. It would, therefore, be interesting for the railways which have experienced ballast liquefaction problems to specify the characteristics of the structures where these problems have been met (bearing surface of the deck, type of deck - isostatic or continuous - natural frequency and damping of the structure, nature of the materials that make up the deck, presence or absence of lateral retention of the track, type of coping used etc.). As far as the design and the load tests are concerned, it is necessary to check that the parameters of the « dynamic » type (stiffness, natural frequency, damping, etc.) of the structures, correspond to the design values. The new high speed lines are particularly sensitive to the transitions between earthworks and the civil engineering structures (bridges, viaducts and tunnels). These are « delicate » points of the infrastructure which can have two types of problems, subsidence and change of stiffness. The subsidence problems are normally associated with different amounts of settling between the two types of structure which affect the longitudinal level. This gives rise to additional maintenance costs, mainly in the first few years of operation of the line. After this the
21/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

problem reduces. The change of vertical stiffness is directly affected by the speed and is due to an increase in the Q forces in the interaction between wheel and rail, deterioration of the track and ballast and also the increase in maintenance costs. It also effects passenger comfort. The problem also occurs on non-ballasted track. There are several solutions to this problem, especially on the basis of the use of selected and/or treated granular materials (technical blocks) with variable geometry, composition and dimensions depending on the country. The costs of construction are generally high. By way of example, in Spain the increase in cost for the construction of a technical block, with respect to ordinary embankments, can vary between EURO 120 000 (EURO 240 000 per bridge) and EURO 140 000 for an underbridge. Given the large number of civil engineering works in new high speed lines, it appears advisable to carefully consider the solutions and dimensions necessary for these transition items. If the speed is increased from 300 to 350 km/h the design of the technical blocks does not change. ENVIRONMENT The aspect of the environment most affected by the increase in speed is the subject of noise. In fact, the nature of the noise changes with speed, such that as the speed increases, the predominant noise which is that of the motor up to 120 km/h, becomes the track noise at 160 km/h, then the pantograph and aerodynamic noises above 250/300 km/h.

As the speed increases, the level of the emissions and their nature increases also, which makes noise abatement screens less effective. In principle it is reasonable to suppose that the more the speed increases the more noise problems will be created. As a result measures should be taken to protect against noise (screens, mounds of earth, etc.), as well as possible modifications of the route or the creation of artificial tunnels or covered sections, modification of the maintenance (grinding) and, of course, modifications to the rolling stock.

22/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

Special attention should be given to the assessment systems for the level of noise. A draft Directive of the European Parliament and Council dated 16 July 2000 (COM 2000 468 final, 2000/0194 COD), regarding the evaluation and the management of ambient noise, specifies the methods of assessment (calculation and measurement) and the noise indicators. Regarding the limitations, each country has its own regulations and the limits are very different. The Rolling Stock STI specifies the noise emission by the value at 25 metres. The remainder of the standards of the various European countries speak of reception coming from all the trains. By way of example, the maximum levels of Leq to be met in France on the front of dwellings close to high speed lines are 60 dB during the day (6.00 am to 10.00 pm) and 55 during the night. In Spain, the limitations for noise are as follows : 55 dB (A) Leq, between 10.00 pm and 07.00 am 65 dB (A) Leq, between 07.00 am and 10.00 pm A further limitation (still in Spain) is that there is a limit of 90 dB (A) Lmax, measured 2 metres from the front of buildings (85 in zones of high acoustic sensitivity) Figure 4 shows for DB AG the different criteria and values obtained between 200 and 300 km/h.

Noise level at 25 m [dB(A)]

Figure 4

105 95 85 75
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

Figure

TRANSRAPID ICE STI IC - DB AG

65

23/53

100

200

300

400

500

Speed (km/h)

27/12/09

FIGURE 4

24/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

5 - PARAMETERS RELATING TO TRACK EQUIPMENT RAIL There is general agreement between the various railways on the fact that it is not necessary to use different types of rail for different speeds. Thus both for 300 km/h and for 350 km/h, it is the rail type 60E1 (UIC 60) which is recommended. There is the same agreement on the grade of steel (900 A) The draft European Standard specifies a superior class of flatness, called “ A ”. The quality of the rail is not, in principle, affected by the increase in speed above 300 km/h, if the rail to be laid is of the “ top of the range ” type. However, it is recommended that attention should be paid to the aspects : acceptance, assembly, welding, surface defects, etc. Certain railways consider that the length of the individual rails should not be close to 36 metres, to avoid running on some particular points due to the welding which have a critical wave length. The inclination of the rail is 1:20 as is normally used in all the countries concerned, with the sole exception of Germany which uses 1:40. The STIs recommend 1:20 for speeds above 280 km/h. The STIs specify the values of the distance apart, inclination and wheel profiles which enable the lowest possible equivalent conicity to be obtained above 280 km/h (without distinction between 300, 350 km/h, etc.). Other things being equal, the higher the speed, the less should be the equivalent conicity. It is necessary to study the wear profile, vis-à-vis the economy of operation and to observe the equivalent theoretical conicity. SLEEPERS
Table 4 shows the parameters of the different types of sleepers used by the railways.

25/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

TABLE 4

CARACTERISTICS OF THE SLEEPERS
COUNTRY (km/h) STI (Draft) Germany 300 350 1 600 Italy Spain Belgium 300/350 300 300/350 300 350 350 (Hypoth) (Hypoth) Two block/ Two block/ Monoblock Monoblock Monoblock Monoblock Monoblock Monoblock Monoblock monoblock monoblock B 90 B75 1 666 1 666 1 666 1 587 1 666 1 666 1 666 1 666 1 666 350 France 300

PARAMETER Type Sleeper (spacing number of sleepers/km) Weight (kg) Length (mm) Width (mm) Height (mm) Effective surface area per rail (cm²) Other characteristics

245 / 290 245 / 290 2 415 / 2 415 / 2 500 2 500 290 290 220 220 2 436 / 2 436 / 3 944 3 944 -

330 2 600 320 180 3 340

380 2 800 330 200 3 780

400 2 600 300 220 3 900 -

400 2 600 300 220 3 900 -

300 2 600 300 222 3 010 -

320 2 600 300 242 3 010 -

300 2 500 300 200 to 215 3 688 (approx.) -

> 220 > 2 250 -

In general In general, for V > for V > 200 km/h, 200 km/h, track track without without ballast ballast

One difference that can be identified between the various railways is that of the weight. Except in Spain, no distinction is made in the other countries for trains running above 300 km/h. The height of the sleepers used in Spain (242 mm) is greater than those used in other countries. The effective surface area of the sleepers is an essential factor for the distribution of the vertical forces exerted on the ballast, but the magnitude of this surface area and its possible variation depending on the speed have not been dealt with in an explicit manner. However, DB AG is at present assessing the use of sleepers that are longer than normal, 2.8 m. In any case, if the forces on the rail increase with the increase in speed and this increase of forces is transmitted to the sleepers through the rail pads and to the ballast, an analysis of the dynamic forces as well as in that of the additional forces (due to braking in particular), would definitely be recommended. RAIL PADS, FASTENING SYSTEMS AND STIFFNESS OF THE TRACK The stiffness of the track must be limited in order to reduce the vertical dynamic forces between wheels and rails, by the use of rail pads under the rail with appropriate characteristics. As far as ballasted high speed lines are concerned (according to the STI), the dynamic rigidity of the rail pads under the rail must not exceed 600 MN/m. Similarly, the total dynamic stiffness of slab track systems must not exceed 150 MN/m.
Rail pads are generally formed of rubber or elastomer elements and one of their main characteristics is the vertical stiffness. It is especially critical on bridges, tunnels and slab track. Table 5 summarises the existing criteria in each country and indicates the thickness of the rail pads used.

TABLE 5

THICKNESS AND STATIC VERTICAL STIFFNESS OF THE RAID PADS
COUNTRY (km/h) France 300 350 9 9

PARAMETER Thickness (mm)

Germany 300 10

Italy 300 10

350 (Hypoth.) 10

Spain 300 6

350 7 100

Belgium 320 10 50-100

Static vertical stiffness 100 100 27 (1) 100 100 (2) 500 (kN/mm) NOTE: It is necessary to check that all the stiffnesses are calculated in accordance with the same standard. (1) Vertical stiffness. Rail pads for the fastener type IOARV 300-1 : 20 - 27 (normal temperature, < 1 Hz) 20 - 40 (normal temperature, < 40 Hz) Minimum: 16 (+ 50 ° C, between 0 and 40 Hz) Maximum: 30 (- 20 ° C, 0 Hz) 50 (- 20 ° C, 40 Hz) (2) Consideration is now being given to the advisability of providing elastomer cushions under the ballast or under the sleeper.

The analysis of the data above shows that there are important differences between the values used from country to country, both regarding the thickness of the rail pads and for their vertical stiffness. On this subject, Figure 5 gives an idea of the optimisation of the vertical stiffness of the track (as an assembly), depending on the various parameters which have an effect on it, the vertical dynamic stresses of the unsprung weight and the power dissipated by deformation of the track. However an excessive increase in the stiffness of the rail pads can have negative consequences on concrete sleepers. FIGURE 5
Figure 5 Power dissipated in the track Vertical dynamic stresses of the unsprung weights

Deterioration of the longitudinal level

Optimum stiffness Vertical stiffness of the track Optimum stiffness : 5 t/mm (200 km/h) 7.8 t/mm (300 km/h) Source : Prof. A. López Pita, 1984

In view of the importance of the vertical stiffness of the track in the track-vehicle dynamic system, this point should be carefully considered so that the optimum value can be found for each variable. Germany has opted to have reduced track stiffness in future and has established a correlation between the weight of the sleepers and the stiffness of the rail pads (it is necessary to specify that it is the secant stiffness, measured between two given values of load). A fastening system has been developed with a distribution plate on an elastic pad with a surface area double that of the rail pad under the rail.

There is a tendency to choose an overall stifness of around 100 kN/mm. In France, the same characteristics have been selected and have not been changed by the increase in speed. The homogeneity of the stiffness values needs to be checked all along the line. In order to assess the ability of the track to carry trains running at speeds of more than 300 km/h, with a minimum maintenance cost it is necessary to try to establish a reference value both for the vertical stiffness of the track and for its damping capacity. OTHER ITEMS OF THE TRACK The characteristics and the problems associated with the track equipment, as well as other items, such as the supports of civil engineering structures, transitions, etc. even though they have a certain importance, have not been considered in this report. It is planned to do this in a second stage of the study.

30/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

6 - LAYING THE TRACK In general, in Europe, the majority of the tracks of high speed lines are laid in ballast. Nevertheless, DB AG also uses ballastless track, for speeds above 200 km/h. This type of track is also used in France in the underground sections where trains run through at a speed of 220 km/h. BALLAST
The characteristics of the ballast (size distribution, minimum thickness) and sub ballast are given in Table 6 for each country.

31/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

TABLE 6

CARACTERISTICS OF THE BALLAST ON THE HIGH SPEED LINES
COUNTRY (km/h) France 300 / 350 25 / 50 30 Shape 30 / 70 Sub layer 20

PARAMETER Size distribution of the ballast (1) : minimum / maximum size (mm) Minimum thickness of the ballast (cm) Minimum thickness of the sub ballast (cm)

Germany 300 22,4 / 63 35 recommended 40 Shape 30 Anti-cold 40

Italy 300 30 / 60 35 12 + 30 (2)

Spain 300 32 / 63 30 25

350 32 / 63 35 30

Belgium 320 25 / 50 35 Shape 50 / 70 Sub layer 20

(1) Size distribution as specified in a national standard (2) 12 cm with bitumen sub ballast and 30 cm compacted sub layer

There are no significant differences between countries regarding the smallest size of the particles used for ballasting high speed lines. The differences measured are often the consequence of the (national) standards applied. A European standard is being prepared. It is the Standard « Aggregates for ballast for railway lines ». The « draft » (prEN 13450) was ready, in April 2001, for submission to the vote. This standard does not specify any requirements for high speed lines. Particular attention is drawn to the presence of fines in the ballast. In certain cases it is necessary to wash the ballast (sometimes to double wash it). Intermediate storage should be avoided, because it may lead to segregation of the ballast (the smallest particles have a tendency to go to the bottom of the pile). Beside the characteristics indicated in this table, it is appropriate to consider the mechanical characteristics of the ballast. Among these can be mentioned : the hardness (Los Angeles coefficient, Micro Deval, coefficient overall hardness coefficient, etc.) resistance to attrition, dimensions, rate of fines, etc. Other things being equal it is possible to conclude that the high quality ballast which exists today could be used without problems for trains that run at 350 km/h. In fact, the requirements do not vary greatly between 300 and 350 km/h. The behaviour of the ballast under vibrations (the possibility of becoming fluid) depending on the speed should also form the subject of an analysis, which should determine at the same time whether it is necessary or not to use anti-vibration mats. In general, these mats are not widely used on high speed lines, but are employed by SNCF in some specific cases for use in certain tunnels as well as by DB AG, in tunnels and on bridges (0.10 N/mm3, thickness 1 cm). Some important aspects, such as the attrition of the ballast or other particles on the rail, the effect of the slipstream or the ballast being blown away and the definition of a typical profile for the layer of ballast (which is important, among other things, to prevent the slipstream) must also be considered when speeds are increased.

Grills should be provided on certain bridges to prevent ballast being thrown on the road. The falling of sheets of ice, formed under trains, causes ballast to be flung about which can cause faults on the rails. Special attention should be given to this when trains run at speeds above 300 km/h. BALLASTLESS TRACK Certain railways (DB AG, FS, SNCF, JR) have developed high speed ballastless track. In particular, in Germany the decision has been taken recently to build sections of high speed lines (or lines with speeds above 200 km/h) by using ballastless track, except for the zones where the trainsets must travel at speeds of less than 200 km/h, such as stations, etc.) At first sight the cost of building these tracks greatly exceeds the cost of building tracks on ballast, but experience shows that, especially in tunnels, the maintenance costs are less than the costs of ballasted track (of the order of 1/5th), due to the slower degradation of the geometrical parameters of these tracks. The German experience shows that the cost of building slab track is between 50% and 75% higher than that for ballasted track. According to Spanish estimates, the cost of slab track would be double and the maintenance cost would be half. These estimates assume a life of 60 years for slab track against 30 years for ballasted track. It is, however, premature to conclude that the overall life cycle cost of ballastless track would be considerably less than that for conventional track. It is also necessary to consider : - the cost of construction and maintenance of the track equipment (including the financial costs)

- the availability of the line (and, in particular, the increase in the capacity) due to the reduction of the time devoted to the maintenance of the track.
34/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

- the increase of the transverse resistance - the disadvantages (possible construction defects, increase of noise, etc.) and their repercussion on the total life cycle cost - the cost of the repairs for maintenance or in the case of derailment - the effects in the case of derailment Moreover, it is necessary to check if this type of track is compatible with the ERTMS, because the reinforcement of the concrete may affect the train aerial. OTHER TYPES OF TRACK There are also other types of track, which have been tested to variable extents : tracks laid on bitumen, specially laid tracks, ladder track, "Riessberger" track, etc. These types of track have not so far been used for high speed lines. 7 – ELECTRIFICATION, SIGNALLING, TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND OTHER LINE EQUIPMENT These aspects will be dealt with in a more detailed manner in a second part of the study. However, some preliminary considerations should be mentioned. With the exception of Germany, where the voltage is 15 kV at 16 2/3 Hz, the other countries mentioned in this report have decided to adopt the system of 2 x 25 kV, at 50 Hz. Both these power systems can be used to increase the train speed up to 350 km/h. The mechanical force necessary (in the catenary) varies between 15 kN at 250 km/h and 30 kN at 350 km/h, passing through 20 kN at 300 km/h. This increase in the mechanical force is possible due to the development of new alloys. The height of the contract wire in the various countries is within the values specified by the draft Technical Specifications (STI), either 5.08 or 5.30 m.

35/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

To run at higher speeds, the power must logically be greater, and, as a result in certain cases, it is essential to plan for a reduction in the distance between sub stations. Regarding the signalling systems, it has been shown that the ERTMS, is in principle, valid up to 500 km/h. Checks must be made to eliminate some doubts regarding the effect of the «passive aerials » such as the reinforcement of the concrete.

36/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

8 – OPERATING CONDITIONS METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS Other things being equal the vulnerability of trains (from the point of view of the stability) to side winds increases with the speed. In addition, wind has an effect on the catenary, and in order to increase its resistance to the side wind, it is necessary to increase the mechanical tension. SNCF has introduced a software program on the new TGV Mediterranean line, to examine the wind parameters (speed, direction, and development). This software reports directly to the management system for the line and, where necessary, causes the speed on the sections affected to be reduced. DB AG imposes speed restrictions when the lateral component of the wind speed exceeds 90 km/h and traffic is discontinued, due to the catenary, when that component exceeds 120 km/h. SNCB limits the speed to 170 km/h when the wind speed is more than 108 km/h, in whatever direction. In certain cases, antiwind screens can avoid a speed restriction in order not to risk overturning high speed trainsets. With very low temperatures, the formation of sheets of ice under vehicles can lead to flying ballast if they fall off (see Chapter 5, ballast). MAINTENANCE Depending on the choice of the distance between track centre lines and the definition of the dangerous zone for the staff (variable depending on the country), when maintenance staff are working on the line the speed in service may have to be reduced below 350 km/h. The speed of 350 km/h will require the imposition of fault detection and correction systems with a very large wave length. The number of points and crossings is largely influenced by the type of traffic, the capacity required from the line and the maintenance conditions. Depending on all these arguments (and others as well), the distance between points and crossings can be between 6 and 7 kilometres, 25 to 30 and even 50 (in the case of slab track). The
37/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

specialists do not always agree and as a result it is necessary to carry out a complete operating - maintenance study for each case. The majority of the maintenance standards (tolerances, geometric quality, wear, grinding of the rails which in principle should reduce the packing, welds, grinding of the welds, traces on the rails, etc.) need to be checked. In particular, it would be interesting to re-examine the contents of the report UIC IF 7/96, « Maintenance of high speed lines », in order to specify more closely the maintenance conditions of this infrastructure with a more multi-disciplinary approach. The characteristics of the «blancs de travaux » should be discussed.

38/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

9 - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONCLUSIONS In general, it can be concluded that with the experience acquired by the railways in the field of high speed, an increase of speed from 300 to 350 km/h is attainable with the current technology. Nevertheless, this report has identified certain subjects which are affected by speed. On the other hand, it has enabled subjects to be eliminated where visibly the choice of 350 km/h in place of 300 km/h has no influence on the criteria adopted, because no new threshold to be crossed has been found. For the subjects selected, the creation of specific Working Groups, coordinated by the High Speed Department of UIC would be desirable. It is, however, beyond doubt that on certain points a considerable time will be required to express an opinion that has the force of a recommendation. One of the first subjects to be considered is the “reserve of speed” that all (or nearly all) new lines have from the point of view of the route of the infrastructure. It appears wise to keep this margin for the future because of the different life of all the parts involved in the operation of a high speed system. The consideration of the type of traffic is very important, since it has immediate and basic consequences on the route of the track, on the maximum axle loads permitted and on the conditions and the equipment for the operation and the maintenance. From this point of view, the co-existence of freight traffic and trains which travel at speeds above 300 km/h does not appear to be very desirable, because of the possible problems with capacity and excess cant. In view of this, it is very difficult to recommend values for the route parameters. The traffic and the presence of hills play an important role in the decisions that have to be taken for this. Regarding the maximum gradients, it is interesting to recall the proposals of the STI for the infrastructure, which considers a maximum gradient of 35 ‰ over a length of 6 km maximum and 25 ‰ over 10 km

39/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

The cant deficiency continues to be the essential parameter to fix the geometric characteristics of the route, once the maximum speed is established. Regarding the transverse section of the lines, the most significant parameters from the point of view of the increase of speed are the distance between track centre lines (with economic implications that can be expensive), the cross section of tunnels and the position of the paths for maintenance staff (an extremely important point for safety) According to the STI, the cross section of tunnels must meet the criteria for the maximum permissible variations of pressure. This limitation arises from the conditions for the health of the passengers and not from their comfort, in the cases when the sealing system fails. The lining of tunnels is favourable from the point of the aerodynamic effects. Regarding bridges, the location of columns close to points should be avoided. In parallel to this it seems sensible to recommend the shielding of the columns in underground stations, to protect them from possible derailments. Long viaducts should be designed (to the extent this is possible) with the objective of reducing the number of expansion joints or even of discontinuing them. Some dynamic effects on bridges are likely when trains run at very high speed. These effects, which may be due to the destabilisation of the ballast bed, or resonance, should be considered when the structures are designed. In the same way the transitions between earth works and civil engineering structures are the cause of problems due to the change of stiffness. This change of stiffness is directly affected by the speed and is the cause of an increase of forces which result in the deterioration of the track and the ballast as well as a reduction of comfort. The aspects which concern the environment (the noise in particular) must also be considered when a new line is designed for speeds which exceed 300 km/h.

40/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

In the Chapter on track equipment, there is no problem with the quality of the rail, but attention needs to be paid to aspects such as, acceptance, assembly, welding and surface defects. The equivalent conicity should be further and further reduced as the speed is increased and the wear profiles should also be monitored. There are no obvious problems for sleepers (checking of the bearing surface only) but there is a lot of interest on the other hand for rail pads, in particular with respect to their stiffness (stiffness of the rail pads and overall stiffness of the track). The homogeneity of the stiffness values should be checked all along the line. The laying of the track (track on ballast compared with track without ballast) still forms a subject for discussion for which the question is not restricted to checking the cost of the life cycle of each, but also the implications with many parameters and elements. Provided high quality ballast is used it can be concluded at first sight that the requirements do not vary much between 300 and 350 km/h. However, the main problems with ballast at very high speed are the proliferation of fines and the segregation of the material, the behaviour of the ballast under vibrations (possibility of becoming fluid), the attrition of the ballast or other particles on the rail and the slip stream effect or flying ballast when trains go by. Also the falling of sheets of ice, that have formed under trains, can cause ballast to be flung about. For the trains that run at very high speed the meteorological conditions can oblige speed restrictions to be imposed when there are strong winds.

41/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

RECOMMENDATIONS The formulation of recommendations for the design and operation of a new line that would allow speeds of more than 300 km/h is a task which far exceeds the scope of a single Working Group. In fact, for a single group of experts it is very difficult to deal with all the questions which are to do both with fixed installations and with rolling stock. Moreover, the Interoperability Technical Specifications (STIs) which are now being prepared, deal with the sub-systems of the infrastructure, the power supply, the maintenance, the control-command system, the vehicles and the operations. One of the priorities is to prepare recommendations for the features which it will not be possible to modify after the line has been built. This is the case for the geometrical characteristics of the route. Or for those which it would only be possible to change at a very high cost (which would be the case for the current civil engineering of tunnels and big structures). It is necessary as a result to identify these elements or variables and to indicate for each one the margins of variation inside which the respective values should remain. In the same way, it is also appropriate to identify the areas where the increase in speed beyond 300 km/h could give rise to different problems or to a different dimension of the present situation and carry out the necessary optimisation studies. Finally, a list of subjects identified as being interesting to study from the point of view of the increase of speed (summary of the points which have been identified throughout the report) is given in the Appendix. The recommendations that are the most developed are mentioned below. The repercussions of the design of new lines with mixed traffic (freight traffic is not recommended at the same time as trains that run at more than 300 km/h but “fast” trains are in principle acceptable) must be carefully considered. A Working Group in the UIC Department for High Speed has already commenced work in this field.
42/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

In 2 track tunnels, the conditions for running a mixture of high speed passenger and freight trains need to be studied from the point of view of the aerodynamics and safety in case of accident. This latter aspect also involves the design of the infrastructure and its suitability for the emergency case. An important question to be discussed is that of the permissible length (for reasons of safety) of each type of tunnel : maximum length in double track, internal connections for two way working, emergency exits, etc. In the chapter on civil engineering works, it appears advisable to study in more detail the questions related to the dynamic effects on bridges, as well as the study of the solutions and characteristics of the transition elements. There are several aspects of recommendations can be given : track equipment for which

The size of the effective bearing surface of the sleepers is an essential factor for the distribution of the vertical forces that are applied to the ballast but nevertheless is a question which has not been dealt with in an explicit way. Similarly, a detailed study of the assessment of the dynamic forces as well as of the supplementary forces (due in particular to braking) would be very advisable. This detailed study would also concern the rails as well as the sleepers, rail pads and ballast. Given the importance of the vertical stiffness of the track in the dynamic track - vehicle system, this point should form the subject of a detailed study which would enable the optimum value of each variable to be determined. Regarding the ballast, a very important aspect in view of prolonging, in particular, the validity of the track on ballast for very high speeds is the definition of a typical profile of the layer of ballast (important among other aspects to prevent the slip stream) The question of ballast or no ballast is not limited to the assessment of the total life cycle costs of the track. Some aspects, such as the track equipment, the availability of the line, the costs and the conditions of maintenance and repair, the forces in the case of derailment, etc. need to be studied in detail.
43/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

Similarly the general aspects related to the maintenance of high speed lines (and its relation with the geometric quality of the track) must be given special attention. One of the most interesting questions is that of maintenance. A study on the definition of the maintenance policy is still to be undertaken, even if the increase in cost is not very large. On this subject, and in addition, the conditions of the staff (choice of the dangerous zone), the majority of the maintenance standards need to be checked. The revision of document UIC IF 7/96 (« Maintenance of high speed lines ») and the extension of the document to other specialities (catenary, signalling, etc.) are proposed. FINAL COMMENTS From information contained in this document it would now be possible to deal in a second step with the more specific questions or even to analyse more thoroughly certain aspects or individual parameters, with a view to preparing the recommendations requested by the General Manager of UIC. The Working Group proposes to specify the principal problems which are raised by the increase of speed beyond 300 km/h without recommending obligatory solutions.

44/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

APPENDIX 1 - PROPOSAL FOR SUBJECTS TO BE STUDIED IN DUE COURSE

Repercussions of running a mixture of high speed and conventional trains on the same line. Conditions for running trains in a mixed traffic regime in 2 track tunnels (aerodynamics and safety) Permissible lengths of tunnels for each solution (one or two galleries) Transition from ground works to civil engineering structures Size of the effective bearing area of sleepers. Assessment of dynamic forces. Detailed consideration of the optimum value of the vertical stiffness of the track. Definition of a typical profile for the layer of ballast. Advantages and disadvantages of ballasted track and unballasted track. Geometric quality of the track and its relation with the maintenance policy and standards. Revision and extension of the report UIC IF 7/96. Preparation of a classification of high speed lines (equivalent to that which exists for conventional lines) Revision of the Prud’homme formula. A permanent discussion on the subject of the very high speed systems (lines, rolling stock, design, operating conditions) In particular, a second part of this report, with more specific questions or more detailed analysis on certain aspects or parameters.

45/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

APPENDIX 2 – BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHICAL STUDY ON THE AERODYNAMIC NOISE OF HIGH SPEED TRAINS UIC, 2001 RECOMENDACION DE LA COMISION EUROPA RELATIVA A LOS PARAMETROS FUNDAMENTALES DEL SISTEMA FERROVIARIO TRANSEUROPEO DE ALTA VELOCIDAD (RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION REGARDING THE FUNDAMENTAL PARAMETERS OF THE HIGH SPEED TRANSEUROPEAN RAILWAY SYSTEM) 21/03/2001 L’EVOLUTION DE LA CATENAIRE POUR LES VITESSES SUPERIEUR A 300 KM/H (THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CATENARY FOR SPEEDS ABOVE 300 KM/H) Gilbert Viviant RGCF, APRIL/2001 RESISTANT TRACK HOMOGENEITY : A WAY TO REDUCE MAINTENANCE COSTS A. López Pita & P. Fonseca Teixeira RAILWAY ENGINEERING 2001 HIGH SPEED RAILWAY TUNNELS. COICE OF INTERNAL DIAMETER TO COPE WITH PRESSURE WAVES AND FRICTION (TRAIN – AIR – TUNNEL) (en Spanish) Manuel Melis & Others 29/03/2001 DRAFT DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND COUNCIL REGARDING THE ASSESSMENT AND THE MANAGEMENT OF AMBIENT NOISE 26/07/2000 AGGEGATES FOR RAILWAY BALLAST (DRAFT) (EUROPEAN STANDARD) 04/2001 LE COMPORTEMENT MECHANIQUE DE LA TRAVERSE (THE MECHANICAL BEHAVIOUR OF SLEEPERS)
46/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

Vassilios Profillidis RAIL INTERNATIONAL 02/2001 RESEARCH OF THE UNIVERSAL TRAIN FOR DYNAMIC CALCULATIONS AVLS – SNCF 06/2000 PIN-PIN RESONANCE AS A REFERENCE IN DETERMINING BALLASTED RAILWAY TRACK VIBRATION BEHAVIOUR A. P. de Man DELF UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY 2000 PREFAB PLATENSPOOR (PREFAB SLAB TRACK) K. H. Oostermeijer CEMENT 1999 DWARSLIGGERSSYSTEMEN (SLEEPER SYSTEMS) K. H. Oostermeijer & K. A. M. Ingels CEMENT 1999 RECHTSTREEKSE SPOORSTAAFBEVESTIGING (DIRECT FASTENING) K. H. Oostermeijer & K. A. M. Ingels CEMENT 1999 INGEGOTEN SPOORRSTAAFCONSTRUCTIE (EMBEDDED RAIL CONSTRUCTION) K. H. Oostermeijer & K. A. M. Ingels CEMENT 1999

47/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

THE DEVELOPMENT OF BALLASTLESS TRACK FOR THE HIGH SPEED LINE SOUTH IN THE NETHERLANDS Rolf Schooleman HOLLAND RAILCONSULT FRAME - SLEEPERS TO LIGHTEN BALLAST – LOAD Klaus Riessberger RAILWAY GAZETTE INTERNATIONAL 02/2000 DAS RAHMEN-SCHWELLEN-GLEIS-EIN INNOVATIVES SCHOTTERGLEIS (THE FRAME SLEEPER TRACK - AN INNOVATIVE BALLAST TRACK) Klaus Riessberger ETR 3/2000 COMPATIBILIDAD ENTRE TRENES DE VIAJEROS EN ALTA VELOCIDAD Y TRENES TRADICIONALES DE MERCANCIAS (COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN HIGH SPEED PASSENGER TRAINS AND TRADITIONAL FREIGHT TRAINS) (Spanish & English) A. López Pita REVISTA DE OBRAS PUBLICAS 11/2000 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION FOR INTEROPERABILITY MAINTENANCE SUBSYSTEM VERSION A 4/2000 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION FOR INTEROPERABILITY ROLLING STOCK SUBSYSTEM VERSION A 4/2000 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION FOR INTEROPERABILITY CONTROL-COMMAND AND SIGNALLING SUBSYSTEM VERSION A 4/2000 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION FOR INTEROPERABILITY INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSYSTEM
48/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

VERSION A 4/2000 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION FOR INTEROPERABILITY ENERGY SUBSYSTEM VERSION A 4/200 DETERMINATION OF THE BRAKING PERFORMANCE OF HIGH SPEED TRAINS ERRI B 126/RP 22 4/1999 DEVELOPMENT OF BALLASTLESS TRACK IN GERMANY Jürgen Mörscher 12/1999 BALLASTLESS TRACK STRUCTURES IN GERMANY G. Leykauf & L. Mattner EUROPEAN RAILWAY REVIEW 9/1995 EIN SCHOTTEROBERBAU FÜR HOHE GESCHWINDIGKEITEN (A BALLAST BED FOR HIGH SPEEDS) Josef Eisenmann & Reinhold Rump ETR 3/1997 ANFORDERUNGSKATALOG ZUM BAU DER FESTEN FAHRBAHN (SPECIFICATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF BALLASTLESS TRACK) Jürgen Mörscher ETR TUNNEL RETTUNGSKONZEPT FÜR FERNBAHNNEUSTRECKEN DER DB NETZ (TUNNEL RESCUE ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE NEW LONG DISTANCE LINES OF THE DB) PONTS-RAILS POUR VITESSES > 200KM/H (RAIL BRIDGES FOR SPEEDS > 200 KM/H) ERRI D 214/RP 9 12/1999
49/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

RESUMEN DE LA DEFINICION TECNOLOGICA DEL EQUIPAMIENTO DE LA VIA PARA LA LINEA DE ALTA VELOCIDAD MADRID - ZARAGOZA - BARCELONA - FIGUERAS (SUMMARY OF THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION OF THE FIXED EQUIPMENT FOR THE HIGH SPEED LINE MADRID – ZARAGOZA – BARCELONA – FIGUERAS) GIF – TIFSA 6/1999 FESTE FAHRBAHN - KONSTRUKTION, BAUARTEN, GLEISLAGESTABILITÄT, INSTANDHALTUNG UND SYSTEMVERGLEICH (BALLASTLESS TRACK - DESIGN TYPES, TRACK STABILITY, MAINTENANCE AND COMPARISON OF THE SYSTEMS) Edgar Darr AN A-Z OF REDUCING TRACK MAINTENANCE COSTS Nigel Ogilvie INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY JOURNAL 12/1999 OPTIMISING BALLASTLESS TRACK FOR HSL-ZUID Kimmo Oostermeijer & Koen Ingels RAILWAY GAZETTE INTERNATIONAL 11/1999 SAVING MONEY WITH ABSOLUTE TRACK GEOMETRY Jörg Marbach INTERNATIONAL RAIWAY JOURNAL 12/1999 COMMENCEMENT OF FULL-SCALE CONSTRUCTION OF TCTYPE LOW MAINTENANCE TRACK Mitsuo Hanawa JAPANESE RAILWAY ENGINEERING 9/1999 PROTECTING THE TRACKSIDE ENVIRONNEMENT Tatsuo Maeda JAPAN RAILWAY &TRANSPORT REVIEW 12/1999

50/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

IL FUTURO DELLA SOVRASTRUTTURA DI BINARIO SU PIASTRA NELLE NUOVE LINEE EUROPEE AD ALTA VELOCITA Joan Manuel Estradé INGEGNERIA FERROVIARIA 11/1999 L’ETR Y 500 : SPERIMENTAZIONE PARTE ELETTRICA Gabriele A. Antonacci & Cesare Bianchi INGEGNERIA FERROVIARIA 6/1993 DEVIATOI INNOVATIVI CON CUORE A PUNTA MOBILE Pasqualino Bernabei, Mario Testa & others INGEGNERIA FERROVIARIA 6/1993 LE SYSTEM GRANDE VITESSE (THE HIGH SPEED SYSTEM) SNCF DOCUMENT AN ASSESSMENT OF THE PROGRAM OF TRIALS AT VERY HIGH-SPEED Pierre Delfosse REVUE GENERAL DES CHEMINS DE FER 4/92 RECHERCHE SUR LA VOIE BALLASTEE (RESEARCH ON BALLASTED TRACK) Nathalie Guérin & Jean-Pierre Huile REVUE GENERAL DES CHEMINS DE FER 4/99 SETTING A NEW MARK OF 345 KM/H IN HIGH SPEED RUNNING TEST ON JOETSU SHINKANSEN Tadaaki Takao & Junji Suzuki JAPANESE RAILWAY ENGINEERING 3/1992 BEWERTUNG UND VARIANTEN VERGLEICH VON BAUARTEN DER FESTEN FAHRBAHN (ASSESSMENT AND COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT DESIGNS OF BALLASTLESS TRACK) Stefan Becker & Karl-Einz Lier FESTE FAHRBAHN 2/99

51/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

RHEDA 2000 - ERFAHRUNG UND FORTSCHRITT VEREINT ZU EINEM SYSTEM (RHEDA 2000 – EXPERIENCE AND PROGRESS COMBINED INTO ONE SYSTEM) Hans Bachmann & Thomas Foege FESTE FAHRBAHN 6/2000 UIC LEAFLET 660 : ARRANGEMENTS TO ENSURE THE TECHNICAL COMPATIBILITY OF HIGH SPEED TRAINS 6/1999 UIC LEAFLET 518 : TESTS AND TYPE APPROVAL OF RAILWAY VEHICLES FROM THE PIONT OF VIEW OF THEIR DYNAMIC SAFETY - TRACK FATIGUE - RIDE QUALITY UIC LEAFLET 794 : INTERACTION BETWEEN CATENARY AND PANTOGRAPH IN THE EUROPEAN HIGH SPEED NETWORK 1/1996 UIC LEAFLET 717 : RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE DESIGN OF BRIDGES TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE LAYING AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TRACK AND TO REDUCE THE NOISE EMISSIONS 7/1995 UIC LEAFLET 779 – 11 : DETERMINATION OF THE CROSS SECTIONAL AREA OF RAILWAY TUNNELS BASED ON AN AERODYNAMIC APPROACH 1/1995 UIC REPORT IF – 7/96 : MAINTENANCE OF HIGH SPEED LINES

52/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

APPENDIX 3 – MEMBERS OF THE WORKING GROUP DBAG GIF FS, SpA RENFE RFF SNCB SNCF EBERHARD JÄNSCH DIEGO GÓMEZ RAFFAELE MELE MARIO TESTA DOMINGO PERA JORGE NASARRE JEAN JACQUES CASASSUS HUGO GOOSSENS MARCEL JOURNET S. MONTAGNÉ (until 30.09.2000) ROLAND BAMBERGER FREDERIC JOSSE ANDRES LOPEZ PITA EMILIO MARAINI (until 30.06.2000) GUNTHER ELLWANGER (from 01.07.2000) IGNACIO BARRON DE ANGOITI

UPC UIC

53/53
newreport350_en.doc/Speed02/cf (27/12/09)

27/12/09

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful