CC BY
27Russian Journal of Logistics and Transport Management, Vol.2, No.2, 2015
© Yuriy I. Efimenko, Maksim V. Chetchuev and Anton G. Filippov Petersburg State Transport University
ACCOUNTING OF THE PERSPECTIVE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS OF RAILWAY STATIONS AND JUNCTIONS
Abstract
The article provides a brief historical overview of the requirements for the accounting of prospects of the development of infrastructure of railway stations and junctions that are contained in the regulations, as well as research and development, design, and other works. The information about the current approach to the accounting of the perspective of the development of design solutions is provided. Examples of schemes of the phased development of railway stations and junctions are presented.
Keywords: phased development, engineering, railway stations and junctions, railway station schemes.
The accounting of the perspective of the development is one of the major requirements for projects of railway stations and junctions, and the idea of this account has passed a long way of formation from the intuitive engineering solutions to precise mathematical justifications. For the first time, the problem of accounting of prospects emerged in the engineering of the railway Petersburg - Moscow, when it was necessary to solve problems, concerning a variety of conceptual schemes of stations, determination of the size of the main equipment, and provision of their further development.
The head of design and construction of this railway, Mr. Melnikov, has offered a number of decisions that went into its design rules. In particular, it was considered as the necessary to design the stations so that 'the expansion of their capacity does not impede the work' (Voronin, 1959).
Further, the work of Rerberg (1868,) should be noted, in which special attention was paid to the need for the correct and favorable placement of station buildings, and the possibility of laying a second main track at stations in case of the increase of the volume of traffic.
According to Galitsinskiy (1899), the meeting of service engineers noted among the main principles of the design of stations the following: 'Each project of the station have to allow for the possibility of further development, junctions and end stations should be designed with some margin against the capacity of the surrounding areas'. In addition, the equipment dimensions are recommended to consider in agreement with the maximum workload rather than average (Galitsinskiy, 1899).
In the works of S.D. Karejsha (1989, 1902), which are devoted to the generalization of experience of the reconstruction of stations due to the increase of the traffic, as well as laying of the second tracks, and also admitted errors, the following principals have been formulated. Those principles provide the possibility of phased development of the station without demolishing the existing equipment. It should be noted that the principles retained their value up to present days. The most important of them stated: "The draft scheme of the new or reconstruction of the existing tracks of the station should be drawn so that it was taking into account all future needs, as well as the case, if the actual size of the work will surpass expectations. However, for the first time, there is no need to lay the entire amount of the tracks shown in the project, since it is appropriate to confine by laying part of the proposed tracks'.
In 1917, the engineer E.L. Fisher in the creation of the project of the development of Petrograd rail junction (Fisher, 1917) supported the proposal of S.D. Karejsha that the project of rail junction development should be designed from the long-term perspective, while the intermediate stages of development can be derived from this project by eliminating elements that are not required at the time of the implementation of each phase.
An important role in determining the prospects for the development played the implementation in the engineering practice the Technical specifications for the construction of stations. It should be noted that, in a pre-revolutionary period of Russian railways development, there were no special technical conditions of the design of rail stations. The questions of the design of stations were given in a few paragraphs of the technical specifications of structures and rules of operation of the railways. A similar situation was in the railways of other countries, excepting Germany, where there was a quite detailed instruction for the designing and construction of stations. However, it was not obligatory for the use.
Recognizing the importance of such a document, the Scientific and Technical Committee of the People's Commissariat of Railways, which received two projects of Technical requirements for the station designing in 1921, developed independently of each other, by S.D. Karejsha and S.N. Kulzhinskiy, has organized a special commission for the development of official technical specifications for the construction of stations, the first edition of which was approved on May 24, 1926 (Specifications for the Designing of Stations on the Railways of Normal Gauge, 1926). The document stated that 'the project of the station should anticipate the possibility of development without major alterations or destruction of permanent structures. However, for the purposes of maintaining the operating efficiency, the equilibrium constant between the workability of the station and the dimensions of the workload, it is necessary:
1) to enter into the project the required gradual performance of work on the development of the station depending on the growth of its work;
2) to foreseen in the case of the permanent or periodical reduce of work, the possibility of temporary or permanent termination of some of its elements (e.g. the closure of some of its tracks and yards, etc.); without compromising the quality and efficiency of the station;
3) at medium and large junction stations should be capable of laying tracks for the possibility of installing emergency reserve in the amount of 10% of the working fleet of the railway.
The project of the middle station should provide gradual development stages of the projected station, the project have to be capable of laying the second tracks on spans and provide limited development of stations with the possibility of connectivity to the rail branches, as well as the development of arrangements for locomotive traction and local operations of processing of goods.
All planned projects development stages should be given in the form of individual projects with appropriate explanatory economic notes, tables, and calculations of throughput and processing capacity of the station.
In Technical specifications for the construction of stations-26, the projects of junction and sorting stations have been calculated on the turnover development for 25 years, while their first phase on the turnover of the next 10 years. Land acquisition for the station should conform fully to its development.
At the beginning of the 1930s, M.M. Protodjakonov first proposed the necessity to take into account the effect of distancing the costs and methods of this account were included in the textbook on investigations and design of railways (Protodjakonov, 1934). The reducing of costs, made in t years, M.M. Protodjakonov proposed to take into account by multiplying by a factor of distancing the cost determined by the formula:
_ 1
^ (!+£«)' ' (1)
where En - normative coefficient of efficiency of capital investments.
Since 1969, the Model procedure of the USSR Academy rjt value was called 'coefficient of reduction' of costs, while the value of En, which was recommended at a rate of 0.1, was replaced by Enp - standard for aligning multitemporal costs equaled to 0.08.
With the transition to a market economy, the rate of discounting Enp was replaced by the discounting rate, while alignment coefficient referred to as the discount factor at. The important role of accounting the effect of distancing costs played in preparing Technical specifications for the construction of stations-33, in which the estimated design time was significantly reduced compared with Technical specifications for the construction of stations-26. Perspective cargo turnover, 'which forms the basis of the project' should be given for at least five
years, and for complicated rail junctions - at least for 10 years ahead. At the same time, the requirement for maintaining of balanced development of the stations was retained: "The individual steps of the station should be received project of full development by the elimination of tracks and equipment that are not required at the time of the implementation of each stage. The subsequent evolution of the station, as a rule, should take place without radical reconstruction by a gradual addition of individual parks and tracks and the development of station arrangements' (Specifications of Stations' Designing,
Since the 1930s, in the theory of mastery in transportation was a question about the reserve capacity of the equipment and devices during the design. G.I. Chernomordik in 1931 has proposed to divide the rail equipment, depending on the cost of the re-conversion into three groups:
1) the elements of the railway sector, which cannot be produced without their radical reconstruction in case of the increased growth of the work;
2) elements that have a full opportunity of phased development almost without any alteration of existing facilities;
3) elements that require their partial reconstruction during the increase of their download.
To the first group of the station elements, dimensions of the depot and sizes of large stations were assigned. The second group of elements was represented by the number of tracks on the stations, depot workshop equipment, and warehousing devices. In the third group, the capacity of the tracks superstructure, the effective length of station tracks, and workshops building were included.
G.I. Chernomordikov introduced the concept of the design capacity of the devices and settlement periods for the design, which were justified in the first years after the war and published in 1948 (Chernomordik, 1948). Design capacity was proposed to relate to the operation of a certain year, which is called the year of settlement or settlement period.
The basis for determining the estimated settlement period became the principle of comparison of additional initial investment Kdop for the creation of a reserve capacity and the cost of rebuilding Kper to achieve the same capacity after t years with regard to alignment of costs.
1933).
If
(2)
Then the estimated period of design is
(3)
Thus, obtained and then rounded settlement periods of 10th, 5th and 2nd years are retained so far, however, with some changes, since the formulas (2) and (3) are not considered operating costs on the options. However, even in the case of taking into account operating costs, the proposed method allows to calculate only the feasibility of enlarging the first (initial) stage of development of the station or junction in order to reduce the cost of the organization of rebuilding. With this regard, the recommendations for other stages of development should be considered on the ground of the method of the phased development of stations. This method was developed by the efforts of scientists from Russian Scientific Research Institute of Railway Transport, Belarusian Institute of Railway Transport Engineers, Moscow Institute of Railway Engineers, Institute of Complex Transport Problems, and Leningrad Institute of Railway Transport Engineers. The method is based on the use of dynamic programming, which allows solving the problem in the circumstances of the growth and reduction of the amount of work. The most reliability is achieved at steady growth of the workload. In this case, the determination of the subsequent phases does not necessary require the knowledge of the dimensions of the workload until the end of the settlement period. That is particularly important in a market economy, when to get an accurate forecast for the long-term perspective is not possible.
In this case, it is necessary to specify, for what term the development of stations and junctions should be calculated. The matter of fact is that the works of S.D. Karejsha, E.L. Fisher, V.N. Obraztsov, as well as the first standards of stations design (Technical specifications for the construction of stations-26 and Technical specifications for the construction of stations-34) that recommended initially to provide a complete project of the development and then allocate the phases from it, do not specify up to what date the project of 'full development' is related.
In the planned economy of the USSR, the development of major stations and junctions was considered in settlement period (the period of the summation of costs) of 15-20 years. But even with such terms forecasts, error in forecasting of work volume was ± 30%. Overseas, the settlement periods are not strictly regulated, but, for example, the sorting station in Montreal, Canada, which was put into operation in 1964, was designed for the 40-year perspective and successfully operates without conversions to date.
A characteristic feature of the modern approach to the definition of perspectives is the development of multiple scenarios, e.g., optimistic, pessimistic, and of average probability. For each scenario, the dynamics of changes in traffic volumes, the amount of construction and installation work, and the estimated cost of construction is determined.
Analysis has shown that in these conditions for a rational phasing of stations and junctions, it is necessary to choose a principal scheme of each station, and then under this schemes to implement the designs of yard necks of stations and the connections between them, that during the phased development
would, require a minimum amount of work on the dismantling of existing tracks and rail switches. In other words, the development of railway parks of the stations will consist in the laying of additional tracks alongside the existing on the reserved areas and connecting them to existing tracks. Analysis of stations schemes showed that the best conditions for the phased development can be achieved in the station schemes with a serial arrangement of parks in which each park can be developed independently of the others.
The development of stations in the junctions should be considered in conjunction with interchanges approaches that should be designed with the allowance for the phased perspective of construction. That is explained by a significant cost of overpasses and approaches to them, as well as by allocation of land for construction, especially in urban and suburban areas where land cost can vary by tens of times in comparison with the cost of land away from the junction (Rybin et al., 2005).
The main advantage of the stations from the perspective is to minimize the amount and cost of work in the implementation of the steps associated with the dismantling of existing tracks, switches, removing of contact network and other equipment for the purpose of allocation of them in a new place. Examples of the realization of this principle are shown in Figures 1—4.
Figure 1 is a scheme of a typical phased development of intermediate station of cross-type, given in the work of Y.I. Efimenko (1991). For the intermediate stations where the number of receiving and dispatching tracks at the sizes of traffic up to 24 pairs of trains taken as equal to two, and for larger volumes, three, the allowance for the perspective implies that the effective length of the tracks should be provided so that, when laying the third track for the receiving and dispatching of trains are not required to disassemble and move the previously laid switches for providing effective length of the track to be placed again. Additionally, in the case of the construction of the second main track, the effective length of the new third track for the receiving and dispatching of trains also should be provided without disassembling and relocation of switches to new locations (Figure 1). The realization of these requirements could provide a minimum number of 'breaking slots' in the schedule of trains for the performance of construction works.
Concerning the precinct stations, the best conditions to take into account the perspective are provided by the station schemes of partly longitudinal type. In these schemes, the displaced receiving yard in case of reservation of the sufficient land space on the outside can be developed with little or no difficulty. Difficulties arise when the development of the receiving yard is located next to the marshalling yard.
Third phase Fourth phase
F^-1
Fig. 1. Scheme of the phased development of an intermediate station.
Fig. 2. Scheme of the phased development of a precinct station.
Fig. 3. Scheme of the phased development of the receiving yard (a) and departure yard (b) of sorting station.
The necessity to disassemble the switches in this park can be provided by the reservation of the land area for the marshalling yard so as to provide a phased laying of the maximum number of tracks in the yard that will be required in the long run. At the same time, the increase in the number of tracks and neck yards development should be based on the minimum reorganization of the existing station equipment.
Figure 2 is a scheme of a three-phase development of the precinct station of the partly longitudinal type, in which the number of tracks is taken from the perspective of 20-year term, and the development of the yard necks at each stage is carried out with the allowance of this point of view (Efimenko and Chetchuev, 2012).
Figure 3 represents schemes of phased development of receiving and departing yards of a one-sided sorting station with a serial arrangement of yards that fully take into account the principle of separation of each stage, based on the long-term prospects of development of station.
The scheme of the phased development of the approaches to the railway junction with the parallel arrangement of the passenger and sorting stations, to which, in perspective, three double-track approaches will be connected are shown in Figure 4.
B
Fourth phase
Fig.4. Phased development of interchanges approaches to a railway junction.
In conclusion, it is important noting that in order to fully take into account the perspective of the future development, it is required to implement the principle of gradual (phased) increase of the number of tracks in yards of railway station and junction, based on the complete scheme of station development for the maximum possible size of the traffic. This principle is particularly effective in the accelerated growth of the volume of work that takes place in the development of infrastructure of Ust-Luga transport hub, and is being successfully implemented in the project development of Luzshskay railway station, developed by specialists of JSC 'Lengiprotrans'.
References
Chernomordik, G.I. (1948). Feasibility Study of Designing Standards of Railways. Transzheldorizdat, Moscow, Russia, 152.
Efimenko, Y.I. & Chetchuev, M.V. (2012). Justification of a rational phasing of neck yards of stations. Science and Equipment of Transport. Moscow: Moscow Institute of Railway Engineering, 3, 29-36.
Efimenko, Y.I. (1991). Selecting of the rational phased development of the intermediate stations for strengthening the capacity of railway lines. Problems of Development of Stations and Industrial Centers: Interuniversity Collection of Scientific Works. Moscow : Moscow Institute of Railway Engineering, 855,124-130.
Fisher, E.L. (1917). Note About the Ordering of Railway Arrangements on Stations, in particular of the Petrograd Junction. Petrograd, Russia, 46.
Galitsinskiy, F.A. (1899). The Capacity of the Railways and Confusion in the Traffic. St. Petersburg, Russia, 249.
Karejsha, S.D. (1899). Notes on the Location of the Tracks and Buildings, and Laying of Switch Tracks on Stations. Litho-printing Partnership of I.N. Kouchner and Co. in Moscow, Kyiv, Russia, 11.
Karejsha, S.D. (1902). On the Design of Location of Tracks and Buildings on Railways Stations. Printing of Y.N. Ehrlich, St. Petersburg, Russia, 23.
Protodjakonov, M.M. (1934). Explorations and Designing of Railways. Transzheldorizdat, Moscow, Russia, 330.
Rerberg, I.F. (1868). Rules for the Arrangement of Tracks, Buildings, and Other Facilities when Designing Railway Stations. St. Petersburg, Russia, 28.
Rybin, P.K., Romanov, V.V. & Goloskokov, I.V. (2005). The influence of the cadastral value of land, land rents, and land tax on the choice of the location of the passenger technical stations in major railway junctions. Actual Problems of Management of Transportation Process. St. Petersburg: Petersburg State Transport University, 5, 34 -40.
Specifications for the Designing of Stations on the Railways of Normal Gauge (1926). Transpechat, Moscow, Russia, 39. Specifications of Stations' Designing (1933). Goszheldorizdat, Moscow, Russia, 128.
Voronin, M.I. (1959). Pavel Petrovich Melnikov. Leningrad Institute of Railway Transport Engineers, Leningrad, Russia, 23.
