| Chapter 3: | ||
| Fig. 1. | Two Ways to Influence the Quality of Trip Phases: e.g. Shorten the Waiting Time and Enhance the Appreciation of the Wait | 20 |
| Fig. 2. | Quality Dimensions in Order of Importance | 23 |
| Fig. 3. | Moving and Staying Translated to Fast and Slow Areas | 24 |
| Fig. 4. | Stimulus–Organism–Response Model | 27 |
| Fig. 5. | Inverted U-curve | 28 |
| Fig. 6. | Inverted U-curve and Psychological Reversal | 29 |
| Fig. 7. | Three Management Dimensions of a Service | 31 |
| Fig. 8. | The Learning Curve for Quality Improvement | 32 |
| Fig. 9. | New Rotterdam Central Station | 35 |
| Fig. 10. | Development of General Score of Rotterdam Central Station | 36 |
| Chapter 4: | ||
| Fig. 1. | The Four Pillars of the DfT’s Community Rail Development Strategy | 47 |
| Fig. 2. | Leeds to Morecambe Community Rail Partnership has worked with train operator Northern and community partners to provide dementia-friendly signage and features, staff training, local awareness-raising, and to show how the railway responds to local needs | 49 |
| Fig. 3. | Devon and Cornwall Rail Partnership’s initiative promoting travel on the Looe Valley line to tourists and local families, drawing on the line’s history | 50 |
| Chapter 5: | ||
| Fig. 1. | Cross Section Through a Ballasted Track System | 63 |
| Fig. 2. | Wheel–Rail Interface Forces on a Train Curving on Canted Track | 66 |
| Fig. 3. | Schematic of an Infinite Beam on an Elastic Foundation with Moving Loads Fn at Axle Offsets dn | 69 |
| Fig. 4. | Influence of Changing Support Stiffness (System Modulus) on (a) Deflection Bowl and (b) Load Transfer for 60 kg/m Rail | 70 |
| Fig. 5. | An Example of a Time Deflection Trace for a Periodic Train (Class 395 Pendolino – Inlay Photo (© Louis Le Pen)) at Three Different Track Support System Moduli, a Speed of 50 m/s, and 60 kg/m rail | 72 |
| Fig. 6. | An Example of a Time Deflection Trace for a Mixed Freight Vehicle Trainset (Freight Vehicle, class 66 loco, Coalfish and Falcon Wagons – Inlay Photo (© Geoff Watson)) at Three Different Track Support System Moduli, a Speed of 50 m/s, and 56 kg/m Rail | 73 |
| Fig. 7. | An Example of a Time Deflection Trace for a Mixed Passenger Vehicle Trainset (Class 91 loco, Mark IV Coaches, Driver Van Trailer – Inlay Photo (© Geoff Watson) at Three Different Track Different Track Support System Moduli, a Speed of 50 m/s, and 56 kg/m Rail | 73 |
| Fig. 8. | Vertical Stress Beneath a Rail Loaded by the Ends of Two Javelin Vehicles | 74 |
| Fig. 9. | Measured Deflection Ranges Along a Section of Mature Ballasted UK Track as a Periodic Passenger Train Passes | 75 |
| Fig. 10. | Typical 35 m wavelength top data for a single rail (left hand) before and after maintenance | 76 |
| Fig. 11. | Typical 35 m wavelength top data for a single rail (right hand) before and after maintenance | 77 |
| Fig. 12. | Approximately Similar Views Along a Track (a) Before and (b) After a Renewal. Before the Renewal, a Localised Section of Mud Pumping Has Led to Relative Vertical Rail Settlement Which Is Visible to the Eye | 77 |
| Fig. 13. | 1/8-Mile SD with Time for Section of UK Track | 78 |
| Fig. 14. | A Typical Mechanised Tamper | 80 |
| Fig. 15. | A Crossing Nose with Switch Tips in the Distance and Modular Bearers | 81 |
| Fig. 16. | Trackbed Design Flow Diagram | 83 |
| Fig. 17. | A trackbed Dug Out Ready for Renewal | 84 |
| Chapter 6: | ||
| Fig. 1. | Definition of an Embankment and Cutting | 93 |
| Fig. 2. | Earthworks Construction on the Great Central Railway Around 1897 | 98 |
| Fig. 3. | Common Modes of Failure and Deterioration in Old Earth Railway: (a) Embankments and (b) Cuttings | 100 |
| Fig. 4. | (a) Deep-seated Embankment Failure near Edenbridge, Kent. (b) Surface Wash-out Failure in a Chalk Cutting near Watford, Hertfordshire | 102 |
| Fig. 5. | Earthworks Failures on Network Rail: (a) Numbers of Earthwork Failures on the UK Network Rail System by Winter, with the Variation from the Long-term Average UK Rainfall, Redrawn from Brown (2014). (b) Earthworks Failure Numbers for Successive Five-year Network Rail Management Control Periods (CPs), from Mair (2021) | 104 |
| Chapter 7: | ||
| Fig. 1. | Frequency Weightings Used for Sound Signals | 117 |
| Fig. 2. | Attenuation with Distance Relative to 1 m for a Line Source, a Point Source and Finite Line Source of Different Lengths | 119 |
| Fig. 3. | Notional Time-history of Train Pass-by Noise Level Indicating Various Measurement Quantities | 120 |
| Fig. 4. | Example of Wheel, Rail and Sleeper Contributions to Radiated Sound at 7.5 m from the Track. Modern Electric Multiple Unit on Modern Ballasted Track | 122 |
| Fig. 5. | Generation of Lateral Creepage from a Nonzero Yaw Angle | 124 |
| Fig. 6. | Noise Levels During Train Pass-by at 25 m from the Track for Various Types of TGV | 126 |
| Chapter 8: | ||
| Fig. 1. | Typical Transverse Profiles of Wheels and Rails | 134 |
| Fig. 2. | Contact Positions on Wheel and Rail for S1002 Wheel Profile and UIC60 Rail Profile for Lateral Offsets of the Wheelset between −10 and 10 mm | 135 |
| Fig. 3. | Contact Patch Size and Vertical Deflection of the Contact as a Function of Normal Load for a Wheel of Radius 0.42 m on a Rail with Radius of Curvature 0.3 m Calculated Using Hertz Theory | 136 |
| Fig. 4. | Normal Stress Distribution on the Centreline of the Contact Patch for a Wheel of Radius 0.42 m on a Rail With Radius of Curvature 0.3 m with a Normal Load of 50 kN Calculated Using Hertz Theory | 137 |
| Fig. 5. | Tangential Force Behaviour | 138 |
| Fig. 6. | Schematic Plan View of a Bogie with Two Wheelsets in a Curve | 139 |
| Fig. 7. | Schematic View of Vehicle Suspension | 140 |
| Fig. 8. | Transmissibility for a Single Degree of Freedom System with Different Damping Ratios ζ, Plotted Against Non-dimensional Frequency ω/ωn | 141 |
| Fig. 9. | Typical Traction Acceleration Plotted Against Train Speed | 144 |
| Fig. 10. | Results for Worked Example for Level Track and 1:100 Gradients Both Up and Down | 146 |
| Chapter 9: | ||
| Fig. 1. | The CPM | 155 |
| Fig. 2. | EN 15227 Compliance Scenarios | 159 |
| Fig. 3. | Like-to-like Impact with an Override Condition | 160 |
| Fig. 4. | Standard Design Case for the 80-tonne Freight Wagon | 161 |
| Fig. 5. | Computer Analysis Showing Deformation of the Driver’s Cab with a Driver Survival Zone Should Be Provided | 161 |
| Fig. 6. | Typical Obstacle Deflector Design | 162 |
| Fig. 7. | Driver’s Seat Indicating the Seat Minimum Clearances | 163 |
| Fig. 8. | L’Autorail Grande Capacité (AGC) Car Body | 164 |
| Fig. 9. | Cab Structure Analysis Model | 165 |
| Fig. 10. | Talent Platform Showing the Energy Absorption Components | 165 |
| Fig. 11. | Basic Composition of a Section of Articulated Train with a Distributed Power Pattern | 166 |
| Fig. 12. | Basic Composition of a Section of Non-articulated Train with a Distributed Power Pattern | 166 |
| Fig. 13. | Energy Absorption Concept for Articulated Vehicles | 167 |
| Fig. 14. | Energy Absorption Device Prior to Crushing | 167 |
| Fig. 15. | Energy Absorption Post Crush | 168 |
| Chapter 11: | ||
| Fig. 1. | Development of HSR Speed (Based on UIC Data) | 189 |
| Fig. 2. | Length of HSR Lines in Service (Based on UIC Data) | 190 |
| Chapter 12: | ||
| Fig. 1. | Timetable Graph for Morning Peak Services on the Victoria Line | 205 |
| Fig. 2. | Historic Railway Route Mileage in Great Britain | 207 |
| Chapter 13: | ||
| Fig. 1. | Principles for Spacing Trains | 224 |
| Fig. 2. | Interlocking Routes | 230 |
| Fig. 3. | ETCS Levels | 235 |
| Chapter 14: | ||
| Fig. 1. | Sustainability Functions of Rail Within Transport, and Industry 4.0 Within Rail | 242 |
| Fig. 2. | The Elements of the Digital Railway and How They Interact | 244 |
| Fig. 3. | RSSB’s Emerging Technologies Radar for Horizon Scanning | 245 |
| Fig. 4. | Overview of ETCS Levels 1–3 | 247 |
| Fig. 5. | Proposed Railway Digital Twin Layers | 254 |
| Fig. 6. | Relationship between Project Management and System Engineering Responsibilities | 260 |
| Fig. 7. | Digital Railway Core Values and Challenges | 261 |
| Chapter 15: | ||
| Fig. 1. | British Railways Board Organisation – 1 March 1978 | 267 |
| Fig. 2. | Matrix Management | 268 |
| Fig. 3. | Multidivisional Structure | 269 |
| Fig. 4. | Initial Privatised Structure | 270 |
| Fig. 5. | Subsequent Privatised Structure | 271 |
| Fig. 6. | Forms of Ownership | 275 |
| Fig. 7. | A Taxonomy of Rail Structures | 276 |
| Chapter 16: | ||
| Fig. 1. | Main Areas of Railway Financial Resources and Outgoings | 283 |
| Fig. 2. | Deficit Funding Versus PSO Contract Payments | 286 |
| Chapter 17: | ||
| Fig. 1. | Distribution of Fatalities in Train Accidents: Europe 1990–2017 | 298 |
| Fig. 2. | Fatal Train Accidents per Billion Train-kilometre: Europe 1990–2017 | 299 |
| Chapter 18: | ||
| Fig. 1. | Typical Interior Layout | 313 |
| Fig. 2. | Plastic Bodyform | 313 |
| Fig. 3. | Impact Velocity Versus Distance of Occupant from Impacted | 318 |
| Fig. 4. | HIC Versus Impact Velocity | 319 |
| Fig. 5. | Seat Systems | 321 |
| Fig. 1. | Two Ways to Influence the Quality of Trip Phases: e.g. Shorten the Waiting Time and Enhance the Appreciation of the Wait | 20 |
| Fig. 2. | Quality Dimensions in Order of Importance | 23 |
| Fig. 3. | Moving and Staying Translated to Fast and Slow Areas | 24 |
| Fig. 4. | Stimulus–Organism–Response Model | 27 |
| Fig. 5. | Inverted U-curve | 28 |
| Fig. 6. | Inverted U-curve and Psychological Reversal | 29 |
| Fig. 7. | Three Management Dimensions of a Service | 31 |
| Fig. 8. | The Learning Curve for Quality Improvement | 32 |
| Fig. 9. | New Rotterdam Central Station | 35 |
| Fig. 10. | Development of General Score of Rotterdam Central Station | 36 |
| Fig. 1. | The Four Pillars of the DfT’s Community Rail Development Strategy | 47 |
| Fig. 2. | Leeds to Morecambe Community Rail Partnership has worked with train operator Northern and community partners to provide dementia-friendly signage and features, staff training, local awareness-raising, and to show how the railway responds to local needs | 49 |
| Fig. 3. | Devon and Cornwall Rail Partnership’s initiative promoting travel on the Looe Valley line to tourists and local families, drawing on the line’s history | 50 |
| Fig. 1. | Cross Section Through a Ballasted Track System | 63 |
| Fig. 2. | Wheel–Rail Interface Forces on a Train Curving on Canted Track | 66 |
| Fig. 3. | Schematic of an Infinite Beam on an Elastic Foundation with Moving Loads | 69 |
| Fig. 4. | Influence of Changing Support Stiffness (System Modulus) on (a) Deflection Bowl and (b) Load Transfer for 60 kg/m Rail | 70 |
| Fig. 5. | An Example of a Time Deflection Trace for a Periodic Train (Class 395 Pendolino – Inlay Photo (© Louis Le Pen)) at Three Different Track Support System Moduli, a Speed of 50 m/s, and 60 kg/m rail | 72 |
| Fig. 6. | An Example of a Time Deflection Trace for a Mixed Freight Vehicle Trainset (Freight Vehicle, class 66 loco, Coalfish and Falcon Wagons – Inlay Photo (© Geoff Watson)) at Three Different Track Support System Moduli, a Speed of 50 m/s, and 56 kg/m Rail | 73 |
| Fig. 7. | An Example of a Time Deflection Trace for a Mixed Passenger Vehicle Trainset (Class 91 loco, Mark IV Coaches, Driver Van Trailer – Inlay Photo (© Geoff Watson) at Three Different Track Different Track Support System Moduli, a Speed of 50 m/s, and 56 kg/m Rail | 73 |
| Fig. 8. | Vertical Stress Beneath a Rail Loaded by the Ends of Two Javelin Vehicles | 74 |
| Fig. 9. | Measured Deflection Ranges Along a Section of Mature Ballasted UK Track as a Periodic Passenger Train Passes | 75 |
| Fig. 10. | Typical 35 m wavelength top data for a single rail (left hand) before and after maintenance | 76 |
| Fig. 11. | Typical 35 m wavelength top data for a single rail (right hand) before and after maintenance | 77 |
| Fig. 12. | Approximately Similar Views Along a Track (a) Before and (b) After a Renewal. Before the Renewal, a Localised Section of Mud Pumping Has Led to Relative Vertical Rail Settlement Which Is Visible to the Eye | 77 |
| Fig. 13. | 1/8-Mile SD with Time for Section of UK Track | 78 |
| Fig. 14. | A Typical Mechanised Tamper | 80 |
| Fig. 15. | A Crossing Nose with Switch Tips in the Distance and Modular Bearers | 81 |
| Fig. 16. | Trackbed Design Flow Diagram | 83 |
| Fig. 17. | A trackbed Dug Out Ready for Renewal | 84 |
| Fig. 1. | Definition of an Embankment and Cutting | 93 |
| Fig. 2. | Earthworks Construction on the Great Central Railway Around 1897 | 98 |
| Fig. 3. | Common Modes of Failure and Deterioration in Old Earth Railway: (a) Embankments and (b) Cuttings | 100 |
| Fig. 4. | (a) Deep-seated Embankment Failure near Edenbridge, Kent. (b) Surface Wash-out Failure in a Chalk Cutting near Watford, Hertfordshire | 102 |
| Fig. 5. | Earthworks Failures on Network Rail: (a) Numbers of Earthwork Failures on the UK Network Rail System by Winter, with the Variation from the Long-term Average UK Rainfall, Redrawn from Brown (2014). (b) Earthworks Failure Numbers for Successive Five-year Network Rail Management Control Periods (CPs), from Mair (2021) | 104 |
| Fig. 1. | Frequency Weightings Used for Sound Signals | 117 |
| Fig. 2. | Attenuation with Distance Relative to 1 m for a Line Source, a Point Source and Finite Line Source of Different Lengths | 119 |
| Fig. 3. | Notional Time-history of Train Pass-by Noise Level Indicating Various Measurement Quantities | 120 |
| Fig. 4. | Example of Wheel, Rail and Sleeper Contributions to Radiated Sound at 7.5 m from the Track. Modern Electric Multiple Unit on Modern Ballasted Track | 122 |
| Fig. 5. | Generation of Lateral Creepage from a Nonzero Yaw Angle | 124 |
| Fig. 6. | Noise Levels During Train Pass-by at 25 m from the Track for Various Types of TGV | 126 |
| Fig. 1. | Typical Transverse Profiles of Wheels and Rails | 134 |
| Fig. 2. | Contact Positions on Wheel and Rail for S1002 Wheel Profile and UIC60 Rail Profile for Lateral Offsets of the Wheelset between −10 and 10 mm | 135 |
| Fig. 3. | Contact Patch Size and Vertical Deflection of the Contact as a Function of Normal Load for a Wheel of Radius 0.42 m on a Rail with Radius of Curvature 0.3 m Calculated Using Hertz Theory | 136 |
| Fig. 4. | Normal Stress Distribution on the Centreline of the Contact Patch for a Wheel of Radius 0.42 m on a Rail With Radius of Curvature 0.3 m with a Normal Load of 50 kN Calculated Using Hertz Theory | 137 |
| Fig. 5. | Tangential Force Behaviour | 138 |
| Fig. 6. | Schematic Plan View of a Bogie with Two Wheelsets in a Curve | 139 |
| Fig. 7. | Schematic View of Vehicle Suspension | 140 |
| Fig. 8. | Transmissibility for a Single Degree of Freedom System with Different Damping Ratios ζ, Plotted Against Non-dimensional Frequency | 141 |
| Fig. 9. | Typical Traction Acceleration Plotted Against Train Speed | 144 |
| Fig. 10. | Results for Worked Example for Level Track and 1:100 Gradients Both Up and Down | 146 |
| Fig. 1. | The CPM | 155 |
| Fig. 2. | EN 15227 Compliance Scenarios | 159 |
| Fig. 3. | Like-to-like Impact with an Override Condition | 160 |
| Fig. 4. | Standard Design Case for the 80-tonne Freight Wagon | 161 |
| Fig. 5. | Computer Analysis Showing Deformation of the Driver’s Cab with a Driver Survival Zone Should Be Provided | 161 |
| Fig. 6. | Typical Obstacle Deflector Design | 162 |
| Fig. 7. | Driver’s Seat Indicating the Seat Minimum Clearances | 163 |
| Fig. 8. | L’Autorail Grande Capacité (AGC) Car Body | 164 |
| Fig. 9. | Cab Structure Analysis Model | 165 |
| Fig. 10. | Talent Platform Showing the Energy Absorption Components | 165 |
| Fig. 11. | Basic Composition of a Section of Articulated Train with a Distributed Power Pattern | 166 |
| Fig. 12. | Basic Composition of a Section of Non-articulated Train with a Distributed Power Pattern | 166 |
| Fig. 13. | Energy Absorption Concept for Articulated Vehicles | 167 |
| Fig. 14. | Energy Absorption Device Prior to Crushing | 167 |
| Fig. 15. | Energy Absorption Post Crush | 168 |
| Fig. 1. | Development of HSR Speed (Based on UIC Data) | 189 |
| Fig. 2. | Length of HSR Lines in Service (Based on UIC Data) | 190 |
| Fig. 1. | Timetable Graph for Morning Peak Services on the Victoria Line | 205 |
| Fig. 2. | Historic Railway Route Mileage in Great Britain | 207 |
| Fig. 1. | Principles for Spacing Trains | 224 |
| Fig. 2. | Interlocking Routes | 230 |
| Fig. 3. | ETCS Levels | 235 |
| Fig. 1. | Sustainability Functions of Rail Within Transport, and Industry 4.0 Within Rail | 242 |
| Fig. 2. | The Elements of the Digital Railway and How They Interact | 244 |
| Fig. 3. | RSSB’s Emerging Technologies Radar for Horizon Scanning | 245 |
| Fig. 4. | Overview of ETCS Levels 1–3 | 247 |
| Fig. 5. | Proposed Railway Digital Twin Layers | 254 |
| Fig. 6. | Relationship between Project Management and System Engineering Responsibilities | 260 |
| Fig. 7. | Digital Railway Core Values and Challenges | 261 |
| Fig. 1. | British Railways Board Organisation – 1 March 1978 | 267 |
| Fig. 2. | Matrix Management | 268 |
| Fig. 3. | Multidivisional Structure | 269 |
| Fig. 4. | Initial Privatised Structure | 270 |
| Fig. 5. | Subsequent Privatised Structure | 271 |
| Fig. 6. | Forms of Ownership | 275 |
| Fig. 7. | A Taxonomy of Rail Structures | 276 |
| Fig. 1. | Main Areas of Railway Financial Resources and Outgoings | 283 |
| Fig. 2. | Deficit Funding Versus PSO Contract Payments | 286 |
| Fig. 1. | Distribution of Fatalities in Train Accidents: Europe 1990–2017 | 298 |
| Fig. 2. | Fatal Train Accidents per Billion Train-kilometre: Europe 1990–2017 | 299 |
| Fig. 1. | Typical Interior Layout | 313 |
| Fig. 2. | Plastic Bodyform | 313 |
| Fig. 3. | Impact Velocity Versus Distance of Occupant from Impacted | 318 |
| Fig. 4. | HIC Versus Impact Velocity | 319 |
| Fig. 5. | Seat Systems | 321 |
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.