ucture cost savings For new-build projects, the main
source of savings has come from technical optimisation which accounts for 41% of total savings. This is followed by optimising construction methods and track availability which generates another 17% of savings. Reducing the amount of track equipment, both for the subgrade and the superstructure, saves another 13% along with optimising the route and planning. Perhaps surprisingly, reducing the amount of land required for a project only cuts the total cost by 3%.
ÖBB analysed where the savings came from on renewal schemes by examining projects which cost more than ƒ1m. It found that 55% of total savings were produced by improving planning, while another 10% could be saved by optimising the organisation of the work. Reducing the cost of disposing of waste materials also saved 10%, whereas carrying out only a partial renewal saved just 7%. Not surprisingly, ÖBB sets great store by planning, and works to a time horizon of about six years for both renewal and new construction schemes. This means it already has a rough plan for the whole network for 2015 showing each project and which machines will be needed each day.
Specific cost savings Savings have also been achieved by
reviewing standards. An examination of +2.65 80 TOR ±0.00 TOR ±0.00 R4.4 55 +2.505 R3.94 Tunnel centre line Track centre Tunnel centre line Track centre ÖBB has reduced the cross-section of single-bore tunnels from a radius of 4.4m to 3.95m.
the subgrade on a double-track line showed that by reducing its width by about 1.25m would enable the ballast bed to be reduced in both width and depth. This was made possible by altering the arrangement of electrification masts and cable troughs, which themselves could be reduced in size, while track centres were limited to 4.5m or even 4m on lines with a maximum speed of 160km/h. ÖBB also discovered that it is possible
to reduce the cross-section of a single- bore tunnel from a radius of 4.4m (from the tunnel centre line to the wall) to 3.95m. This was achieved through
measures in three key areas: displacement of the track towards the tunnel axis, optimising the slab track, and adapting the suspension system
modifying the drainage system, installing an overhead conductor rail rather than conventional catenary, and
eliminating the water supply line, and conducting aerodynamic modelling including scenario studies.
ÖBB has developed a metholodogy called the New Austrian Track Analysis System (Natas) to help it analyse the condition of the track better and determine the best course of action. For example, Natas can show where the rate of track settlement has increased due to poor drainage. The system contains various rail wear parameters and their limits which help ÖBB to plan rail replacement more effectively. “We produced a geotechnical information map of the network to see what condition the track is in,” Nemetz
Heavy mast with wire tensioner
Heavy mast with wire tensioner
Heavy mast
Heavy mast The design of overhead electrification equipment has been simplified to replace two 1120m half-section spans (above) with a single 1340m span.
Wire tensioner IRJ January 2014
Cable stay
Fixed point anchor
Cable stay
Wire tensioner 35
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44