Railway simulation using OpenTrack in Finland

(1)

21.1.2008, Kosonen Tero, page 1

Railway simulation using OpenTrack in

Finland

Tero Kosonen

VR-Track Ltd / Railway Consulting

Contents:

• Overview of the Finnish railway scene

• All OpenTrack simulation studies done in Finland • Previews of some OpenTrack studies

• Helsinki main station study

• Pasila–Riihimäki capacity increase study • Summary

(2)

Track network in Finland

• Length of track network

5,700 kilometres

• Electrified track

• Remote-controlled track

• Railway service locations

480 T O RNIO KEM I RO VANIEM I O UL U IISAL M I HAAPAJÄRVI YL IVIESKA KAJAANI VARTIUS RAAHE KOKKOLA VAASA SÄKÄNIEM I PIEKSÄM ÄKI KUO PIO IM AT RA VAINIKKAL A HAM INA KO T KA RIIHIM ÄKI T URKU T O IJALA T AM PERE KO UVO L A HEL SINKI HANKO KO KEM ÄKI RAUM A PO R I KASKINEN NIIRALA O RIVESI RIIHIM ÄKI

KIR KKO NUM M I HU O PALAHT I VANT AANKO SKI

T IKKURIL A KERAVA HYVINKÄÄ SEINÄJOKI LUUM ÄKI HEL SINKI L EPPÄVAAR A JYVÄSKYL Ä PARIKKAL A JO EN SUU IL O M ANT SI M IKKEL I HEINO L A KO L ARI UIM AHARJU KO NT IO M ÄKI KEL L O SEL KÄ IM AT RANKO SKI SIIL INJÄRVI Single track Double track Four track

(3)

Traffic volumes – Freight

• Total amount of freight on rail is about 45 Mio tonnes / year

• Traffic is quite well distributed around the network

• Largest traffic volumes are in Eastern Finland (on some sections over 10 Mio tonnes / year)

• Russian import and transit

traffic is about 30 % of the total volume (wood, oil, ore etc.)

(4)

Traffic volumes – Passenger long distance

• Total amount of long distance passenger trips is about

12 Mio / year

• The system and most of the traffic is Helsinki-based

• Northern mainline between Helsinki and Oulu has the

largest volumes (about 5 Mio / year Helsinki–Riihimäki)

• Western and eastern main lines have over 1 Mio

passengers

• Traffic to Russia is about 350 000 passengers / year

(5)

Current capacity problems

T O RNIO KEM I RO VANIEM I OULU IISAL M I HAAPAJÄRVI YL IVIESKA KAJAANI VARTIUS RAAHE KOKKOLA VAASA SÄKÄNIEM I PIEKSÄM ÄKI KUO PIO IM AT RA VAINIKKALA HAMINA KOTKA RIIHIM ÄKI T URKU T O IJALA TAMPE RE KOUVOLA HE LS INKI HANKO KO KEM ÄKI RAUM A PO R I KASKINEN NIIRALA O RIVESI RIIHIM ÄKI

KIR KKO NUM M I HU O PALAHT I VANT AANKO SKI

T IKKUR IL A KERAVA HYVINKÄÄ SEINÄJOKI LUUM ÄKI HE LS INKI L EPPÄVAAR A JYVÄSKYL Ä PARIKKAL A JOENSUUIL O M ANT SI M IKKEL I HEINO L A KO L ARI UIM AHARJU KO NT IO M ÄKI KEL L O SEL KÄ IM AT RANKO SKI SIIL INJÄRVI

Capacity totally in use

Possibilities of adding new traffic limited

(6)

OpenTrack simulation studies in Finland

TORNIO KEMI ROVANIEMI OULU IISALMI HAAPAJÄRVI YLIVIESKA KAJAANI VARTIUS RAAHE KOKKOLA VAASA SÄKÄNIEMI PIEKSÄMÄKI KUOPIO IMATRA VAINIKKALA HAMINA KOTKA RIIHIMÄKI TURKU TOIJALA TAMPERE KOUVOLA HELSINKI HANKO KOKEMÄKI RAUMA PORI KASKINEN NIIRALA ORIVESI SEINÄJOKI LUUMÄKI JYVÄSKYLÄ PARIKKALA JOENSUUILOMANTSI MIKKELI HEINOLA KOLARI UIMAHARJU KONTIOMÄKI KELLOSELKÄ IMATRANKOSKI SIILINJÄRVI

Helsinki main station study 2004 Ilmala passenger depot study 2005 Turku–Toijala traffic analysis 2006 Tampere area traffic study 2006

New eastern high speed line study 2006 New Vuosaari harbour study

2006

Master’s thesis of OpenTrack calibration 2007

New airport line traffic study 2007

Master’s thesis of using OT in capacity allocation process 2008

Helsinki–Riihimäki capacity increase 2008 Kolari iron ore mine study 2008

(7)

Examples of finished studies

Helsinki main station study 2004

• Study was made for analyzing significant traffic increase planned for 2006 (from 967 trains/day to 1040 trains/day)

• Train amounts had increased in 1995–2003 over 70 %  would there be capacity left for additional increase?

• For initial data we had only preliminary future timetable structures, all the rostering and track usage had to be planned during the project • Three different traffic scenarios were simulated

• Existing production timetable 2003 (for comparison) • 2006 traffic planned with existing operation principles • 2006 traffic planned with alternative operation principles • This combination made possible:

• Analyzing the traffic increase without operation principle change • Would there be advantages in changing them

(8)

Examples of finished studies

Helsinki main station study 2004 – track usage schedule

Lähtevät 30 31 32 3334 35 3637 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 4647 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 5556 57 58 59 9:00 1 2 34 5 67 8 910 11 12 1314 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2324 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 3233 34 3536 37 38 3940 41 42 43 4445 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 5455 56 57 58 59 10:00 12 3 4 5 6 7 89 10 11 12 13 14 15 1617 18 19 20 2122 23 24 2526 27 2829 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 3738 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 4748 49 50 51 5253 54 55 5657 58 59 11:00 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 1415 16 1718 19 20 21 2223 24 25 26 27 28 2930 31 3233 34 35 36 37 3839 40 41 4243 44 4546 47 48 4950 51 52 53 5455 56 57 58 59 12:00 Pendo 3 # # IC # # # # # Taajam a # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Kaupunki # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Pika Saapuvat 30 31 32 3334 35 3637 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 4647 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 5556 57 58 59 9:00 1 2 34 5 67 8 910 11 12 1314 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2324 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 3233 34 3536 37 38 3940 41 42 43 4445 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 5455 56 57 58 59 10:00 12 3 4 5 6 7 89 10 11 12 13 14 15 1617 18 19 20 2122 23 24 2526 27 2829 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 3738 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 4748 49 50 51 5253 54 55 5657 58 59 11:00 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 1415 16 1718 19 20 21 2223 24 25 26 27 28 2930 31 3233 34 35 36 37 3839 40 41 4243 44 4546 47 48 4950 51 52 53 5455 56 57 58 59 12:00 Pendo 2 # # # 4 IC # # # # # # Taajam a # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Kaupunki # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Pika ## # ## ## Raide 30 31 32 3334 35 3637 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 4647 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 5556 57 58 59 9:00 1 2 34 5 67 8 910 11 12 1314 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2324 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 3233 34 3536 37 38 3940 41 42 43 4445 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 5455 56 57 58 59 10:00 12 3 4 5 6 7 89 10 11 12 13 14 15 1617 18 19 20 2122 23 24 2526 27 2829 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 3738 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 4748 49 50 51 5253 54 55 5657 58 59 11:00 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 1415 16 1718 19 20 21 2223 24 25 26 27 28 2930 31 3233 34 35 36 37 3839 40 41 4243 44 4546 47 48 4950 51 52 53 5455 56 57 58 59 12:00 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010

225 veturin ym päriajo Linnunlaulussa veturin ym päriajo Linnunlaulussa

011 012 013 014 015 116 016 017 018 019 120 Saapuvat ₃₀ 31 32 3334 35 3637 38 39 ₄₀ 41 42 43 44 45 4647 48 49 ₅₀ 51 52 53 54 5556 57 58 59 9:00 1 2 34 5 67 8 9₁₀ 11 12 1314 15 16 17 18 19 ₂₀ 21 22 2324 25 26 27 28 29 ₃₀ 31 3233 34 3536 37 38 39₄₀ 41 42 43 4445 46 47 48 49 ₅₀ 51 52 53 5455 56 57 58 59 10:00 12 3 4 5 6 7 89 ₁₀ 11 12 13 14 15 1617 18 19 ₂₀ 2122 23 24 2526 27 2829 ₃₀ 31 32 33 34 35 36 3738 39 ₄₀ 41 42 43 44 45 46 4748 49 ₅₀ 51 5253 54 55 5657 58 59 11:00 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 9₁₀ 11 12 13 1415 16 1718 19 ₂₀ 21 2223 24 25 26 27 28 29₃₀ 31 3233 34 35 36 37 3839 ₄₀ 41 4243 44 4546 47 48 49₅₀ 51 52 53 5455 56 57 58 59 12:00 Pendo IC # # # Taajam a ## ## ## ## # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## Kaupunki # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Pika # Lähtevät 30 31 32 3334 35 3637 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 4647 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 5556 57 58 59 9:00 1 2 34 5 67 8 910 11 12 1314 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2324 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 3233 34 3536 37 38 3940 41 42 43 4445 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 5455 56 57 58 59 10:00 12 3 4 5 6 7 89 10 11 12 13 14 15 1617 18 19 20 2122 23 24 2526 27 2829 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 3738 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 4748 49 50 51 5253 54 55 5657 58 59 11:00 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 1415 16 1718 19 20 21 2223 24 25 26 27 28 2930 31 3233 34 35 36 37 3839 40 41 4243 44 4546 47 48 4950 51 52 53 5455 56 57 58 59 12:00 Pendo # IC # # Taajam a ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## # ## ## Kaupunki # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Pika 9071 9073 9467 9075 9328 9752 9463 9442 9330 9067 9438 9465 9461 9069 9749 9927 9753 9931 9747 112 8495 8481 8327 110 53 111 109 8491 113 313 204 9761 9757 9755 5 9759 225 85 53 9754 54 315 104 222 310 v 102 82 353 9457 9335 9065 9320 9459 9326 624 9436 9751 9935 9768 9471 9078 9469 9460 9077 9079 9081 9473 8454 108 8493 8485 106 52 309 v 8322 8707 8454 8678 8471 8325 8055 8053 8684 8701 8703 8711 8713 8067 8717 8077 8085 8721 8723 8335 8727 8333 8735 8743 8337 8692 8113 8071 8061 8755 8103 8731 8095 8781 8773 8089 8761 8107 8765 8341 8777 8753 8767 8741 8747 9434 9743 8466 8497 8475 8331 8501 9923 9745 9475 203 308 Ilmala Ilmala 666 9746 3 309 306 v 9924

(9)

Examples of finished studies

Helsinki main station study 2004 – simulation model

Line length 11.5 km

Total track length 85.0 km

Number of „stations“ 13

Number of signals 225

Number of routes 680

Number of elements 1280

Number of train movements per simulation run

- timetable 2003 350

- timetable 2006 380

- timetable 2006 improved 370

Duration of a simulation (from 4 to 10 am) ~ 15 min Number of output files per simulation run ~ 8200

(10)

21.1.2008, Kosonen Tero, page 10 0 % 10 % 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 % 100 % 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019 Occupation 2003 Occupation 2006 classic Occupation 2006 imroved Average occ. 2003 Average occ. 2006 classic Average occ. 2006 improved

Examples of finished studies

(11)

Examples of finished studies

Helsinki–Riihimäki-line capacity increase 2008

Riihimäki

Hyvinkää Jokela Järvenpää Kerava Tikkurila Pasila Helsinki Update of an existing model Vuosaari New model

• Objective of the study was to determine necessary infrastructure improvements in order to increase commuter traffic amount • For initial data we had preliminary timetable

structures and suggestions of the infrastructure improvements

• Rostering and track usage schedules for

Riihimäki had to be planned during the project • Helsinki main yard was left out from the model

because of its complexity

• The simulation process was done in two

different companies – VR-Track and Ramboll Finland

(12)

Examples of finished studies

Helsinki–Riihimäki-line capacity increase 2008 - model

Pasila Järvenpää Nuppulinna Hyvinkää Riihimäki Haarajoki Kerava Tikkurila Vuosaari Palopuro New bypass sidings

(13)

Examples of finished studies

Helsinki–Riihimäki-line capacity increase 2008 - results

Occupations / morning peak hours to south

0 % 10 % 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 % Riihi mäk i Paav ola Hyvin kää Palopuro Jo kela Nupp ulinn a Järv enpä ä Kyrö lä Kytö maa Kera va Savio / Ti kkur ila Tikk urila Malm i / O ulun kylä Pasil a % Alt B Alt A 2007 60 % Occupation > 60 %

(14)

Examples of finished studies

Helsinki–Riihimäki-line capacity increase 2008 - results

Pasila Vuosaari Riihimäki Perturbated traffic - alternative A

0,0 50,0 100,0 150,0 200,0 250,0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

number of perturbated run

s u m o f d e la y s ( m in )

(15)

Examples of finished studies

Helsinki–Riihimäki-line capacity increase 2008 – results

• With simulation we were able to define following infrastructure improvements

• By-pass sidings should be longer than first suggested

• Tikkurila station proved to be a bottleneck  changes to layout should be made

• Also minor changes to other station layouts should be carried out • Some additional improvements suggested before the simulation

could be dropped out

• Certain improvement requests to OpenTrack were made during the project

• Ability to define track occupation observing intervals  under way? • DelEnd-file observation point should be changed  done

(16)

Summary

Experiences from OpenTrack

• With OT we have been able to study and analyze wide variety of rail traffic problems starting from small travel time analysis ending to complex dead-end track yard studies

• After implementing OT our scope of simulation studies has widened quite much

• Simulation itself is still only a tool, the user has to know exactly what he/she is doing to get correct results

• Until now we have focused on double track studies  considering the situation in Finland, single track studies are inevitable

Future challenges

• Single track section modelling with heavy traffic?