daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old October 13th, 2016, 07:02 PM   #1961
bluemeansgo
Registered User
 
bluemeansgo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 451
Likes (Received): 124

Quote:
Originally Posted by M-NL View Post
I was under the impression that it was always JR East's intention to increase the speed in steps. The testing concluded that some extra noise preventing measures are needed to allow speed raises past 320 km/h. That's why they stuck to 320 km/h for now, but future options remain open.
That was my impression, as well. They need to improve sound dampening and ensure stopping adequate performance from 360km/h.

And let's be honest, slowly raising speeds incrementally over a period of years is a very Japanese thing to do. Japan is very "Apple" in its incremental progressiveness.

- Add a feature, announce an improvement.
- Add a feature, announce an improvement.
- Add a feature, announce an improvement.

I expect we'll see increases to 330km/h, 350km/h, 360km/h...
bluemeansgo no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old October 13th, 2016, 07:52 PM   #1962
00Zy99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,980
Likes (Received): 1507

In 1954, SNCF pushed train and track to the absolute limit to reach 250 kph.

In 2007, they achieved 575 kph with considerably less strain on the systems.

There is still room for improvement.
00Zy99 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2016, 04:09 AM   #1963
SamuraiBlue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,232
Likes (Received): 195

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemeansgo View Post
That was my impression, as well. They need to improve sound dampening and ensure stopping adequate performance from 360km/h.

And let's be honest, slowly raising speeds incrementally over a period of years is a very Japanese thing to do. Japan is very "Apple" in its incremental progressiveness.

- Add a feature, announce an improvement.
- Add a feature, announce an improvement.
- Add a feature, announce an improvement.

I expect we'll see increases to 330km/h, 350km/h, 360km/h...
From Wiki JP
Quote:
360km/h走行時の25m騒音は、E2系1000番台での同速度における試験結果と比較して5dB強の低減が見られた[17]。ただし、E2系1000番台による275km/h走行よりは大きな騒音値となっており[17]、現状非悪化速度は330km/h程度となった[12]。車体寸法の制約が大きい「新幹線E955形電車(Fastech 360Z)」での騒音低減が難しかったことが編成全体の営業最高速度における制約となった。
車内静粛性や直線明かり区間での乗り心地に関してはE2系275km/h走行と同等以上のレベルに仕上がったが、360km/hでの曲線通過や「Fastech 360Z」併結時のトンネル内動揺については課題が残った[18]。
以上のことから当初の計画であった最高速度360km/hでの営業運転は断念し、最終的にはコスト面も配慮した結果、最高速度320km/hでの営業運転となった。
Basically in terms of sound pollution compared to E2 1000type running at 275Km/h they say a 5dB reduction was achieved with the Fasttech E954 but they also note that this improvement will deteriorate beyond 330Km/h and with the limit in configuration of size this will be the limit for commercial operation speed.
With concerns in cost they had decided to set the commercial speed limit at 320Km/h.

They can't reduce size to make it more faster since it completely defeats the initial objective of mass transportation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 00Zy99 View Post
In 1954, SNCF pushed train and track to the absolute limit to reach 250 kph.

In 2007, they achieved 575 kph with considerably less strain on the systems.

There is still room for improvement.
Both are PR stunts which had no actual commercial practicality in it.
That is why the TGV still requires more than 20Km to reach top speed. With that kind of acceleration rate you'll reach the next stop making it less useful as a mass transportation system requiring to move stations apart further then present intervals making it less useful for people living midways.
SamuraiBlue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2016, 04:26 AM   #1964
sacto7654
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 796
Likes (Received): 283

I think what JR East intends to do is from Utsunomiya Station north all the way to Shin-Aomori, they intend to push the top speed to 320 km/h. And that means between Morioka and Shin-Aomori, trains will travel at 320 km/h even through those long tunnels.
sacto7654 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2016, 05:05 AM   #1965
00Zy99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,980
Likes (Received): 1507

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuraiBlue View Post
F
Both are PR stunts which had no actual commercial practicality in it.
That is why the TGV still requires more than 20Km to reach top speed. With that kind of acceleration rate you'll reach the next stop making it less useful as a mass transportation system requiring to move stations apart further then present intervals making it less useful for people living midways.
But acceleration rates are improving. As is top speed.

That's my point. You can't really say that there will be no improvements given that today's performance is beyond the dreams of 60 years ago.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sacto7654 View Post
I think what JR East intends to do is from Utsunomiya Station north all the way to Shin-Aomori, they intend to push the top speed to 320 km/h. And that means between Morioka and Shin-Aomori, trains will travel at 320 km/h even through those long tunnels.
If they were able to have dedicated 320 kph all the way through from Ueno/Omiya to Sapporo, how long would it take? I once estimated it at being able to reach Hakodate within 2 hours at that rate.

I know its unlikely, but what sort of improvements would allow this north of Aomori and south of Utsunomiya? The latter is likely mostly noise control, which might be rectifiable with more insulation and sound walls.
00Zy99 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2016, 11:18 AM   #1966
SamuraiBlue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,232
Likes (Received): 195

Quote:
Originally Posted by 00Zy99 View Post
But acceleration rates are improving. As is top speed.

That's my point. You can't really say that there will be no improvements given that today's performance is beyond the dreams of 60 years ago.
Present E5s motors are water cooled which is the limit. Beyond that they will need to utilize cryogenic coolant with super conductors as magnets. As I said they are at the limit for economic practicality.
Improvements has limits since there is always a ceiling in growth potential with cost in applying new technology.
You are also forgetting that both speed as well as acceleration applies a severe penalty in wear and tear from abrasion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 00Zy99 View Post
If they were able to have dedicated 320 kph all the way through from Ueno/Omiya to Sapporo, how long would it take? I once estimated it at being able to reach Hakodate within 2 hours at that rate.

I know its unlikely, but what sort of improvements would allow this north of Aomori and south of Utsunomiya? The latter is likely mostly noise control, which might be rectifiable with more insulation and sound walls.
Again no since faster means more vibration. Noise includes low frequency sound vibration propagated through the rail to the ground which rattles the foundation. That is why there is a lower speed limit set through residential districts. No sound walls can rectify that without removing contact between the moving object and the ground.
SamuraiBlue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2016, 01:56 PM   #1967
PredyGr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 69
Likes (Received): 4

In regard to noise emissions...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JREast tech review
The running speed of the coupled operation of FASTECH360Z
and FASTECH360S with the same noise level as 275 km/h
running of present coupled Shinkansen trains is 330 km/h, and
is 340 km/h in FASTECH360S single operation.
The 320 kph limitation came from ride comfort reasons. The chosen 1.5 degree tilt for commercial operation means that the max allowable lateral steady acceleration is reached at 320 kph.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JREast tech review
The car body tilt angle that the car with a car body tilt control system requires to meet 0.9 m/s2 or less lateral steady acceleration in curving can be figured out in the following formula....
The above-mentioned formula shows that the maximum speed at which a train can run on a curve of 4,000 m radius and 155 mm cant within the allowable lateral steady acceleration under the condition of two-degree car body tilt angle is 330 km/h (320 km/h in case of 1.5-degree car body tilt angle).
PredyGr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2016, 03:19 PM   #1968
00Zy99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,980
Likes (Received): 1507

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuraiBlue View Post
Present E5s motors are water cooled which is the limit. Beyond that they will need to utilize cryogenic coolant with super conductors as magnets. As I said they are at the limit for economic practicality.
Improvements has limits since there is always a ceiling in growth potential with cost in applying new technology.
You are also forgetting that both speed as well as acceleration applies a severe penalty in wear and tear from abrasion.
These are current limitations due to material sciences at the moment. There is no reason to believe that they will not be exceeded in the future. Improved lubricants and ceramics are currently being developed that hold promise in this field.

Quote:
Again no since faster means more vibration. Noise includes low frequency sound vibration propagated through the rail to the ground which rattles the foundation. That is why there is a lower speed limit set through residential districts. No sound walls can rectify that without removing contact between the moving object and the ground.
Rubber-block isolation systems have proven extremely effective in stopping such noise on submarines. Installing such systems would probably be cheaper than building a maglev line through the same neighborhood.
00Zy99 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2016, 04:11 PM   #1969
SamuraiBlue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,232
Likes (Received): 195

Quote:
Originally Posted by 00Zy99 View Post
These are current limitations due to material sciences at the moment. There is no reason to believe that they will not be exceeded in the future. Improved lubricants and ceramics are currently being developed that hold promise in this field.



Rubber-block isolation systems have proven extremely effective in stopping such noise on submarines. Installing such systems would probably be cheaper than building a maglev line through the same neighborhood.
Which all comes with a price.
Ceramics are not conductive or magnetic and the lubricants will not help since the heat is generated by the copper wiring within the motor. As you pump more electricity in them to gain a stronger magnetic field to run the motor faster.Heat is generated by the electrical resistance within copper which will melt the motor without a cooling system. The only material that can handle large amount of electricity without generating heat are super conductive material which requires cryogenic cooling since it only becomes super conductive under very low temperatures.

As for the rubber, it bleeds oil blended within the rubber to provide it's elasticity and becomes brittle if you constantly apply stress adding one more item that needs constant maintenance making it more costly.
SamuraiBlue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2016, 07:22 PM   #1970
00Zy99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,980
Likes (Received): 1507

I was using examples of advances in material science. There are sure to be other advances that will also bring costs down. And the superconductors will be cheaper. Rehabilitating existing infrastructure will continue to be cheaper and less disruptive than replacement.

If submarines can deal with having massive amounts of rubber shock-absorbers, I see no reason why HSR can not.
00Zy99 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2016, 10:03 PM   #1971
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

Submarines are used almost exclusively for military purposes where cost is of little concern...

But back to railways - Chinese did run their trains at 350 km/h for few years. Probably at the cost of increased wear/tear and perhaps noise as well (anyone here with a first hand experience?), but it certainly was technically possible in commercial service.
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2016, 04:00 AM   #1972
SamuraiBlue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,232
Likes (Received): 195

Quote:
Originally Posted by 00Zy99 View Post
Rehabilitating existing infrastructure will continue to be cheaper and less disruptive than replacement.
You're also forgetting that with increase of speed you require larger curve radius in which present radius are optimized for no more than 350Km/h so you'll require to realign most of the line disrupting traffic anyways or utilize the present line and limit it to present speed calling them classic lines.

At the end everything will need to be renovated and replaced so up-grading to maglev is not much of a difference.
SamuraiBlue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2016, 04:25 AM   #1973
00Zy99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,980
Likes (Received): 1507

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuraiBlue View Post
You're also forgetting that with increase of speed you require larger curve radius in which present radius are optimized for no more than 350Km/h so you'll require to realign most of the line disrupting traffic anyways or utilize the present line and limit it to present speed calling them classic lines.

At the end everything will need to be renovated and replaced so up-grading to maglev is not much of a difference.
Curve realignment is much easier to do than you seem to think-note Japan's repeated ability to shift alignments overnight in construction activities.

And there soon will be 400 kph lines, such as California.

Besides, 350 kph is more than adequate for most travel corridors for the foreseeable future. You can get about 1000 kilometers in three hours, which is the time frame that trains are able to compete with airplanes. That is long enough for most city pairs within Japan or elsewhere.

Besides, HSR lines will continue to be built primarily for passenger-only operation and for operating at higher speeds than traditional networks, which means distinguishing them continues to makes sense. And what better designation than High-Speed Rail, which exactly describes it?
00Zy99 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2016, 05:12 AM   #1974
SamuraiBlue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,232
Likes (Received): 195

Quote:
Originally Posted by 00Zy99 View Post
Curve realignment is much easier to do than you seem to think-note Japan's repeated ability to shift alignments overnight in construction activities.
Ignorance talking not knowing the details.
The construction that was done on lines such as Tokyu and Odakyu was in part due to the realignment in a vertical direction not a lateral one which would be required in realigning curve radius and cost of constructing is still present.



Quote:
Originally Posted by 00Zy99 View Post
Besides, 350 kph is more than adequate for most travel corridors for the foreseeable future. You can get about 1000 kilometers in three hours, which is the time frame that trains are able to compete with airplanes. That is long enough for most city pairs within Japan or elsewhere.

Besides, HSR lines will continue to be built primarily for passenger-only operation and for operating at higher speeds than traditional networks, which means distinguishing them continues to makes sense. And what better designation than High-Speed Rail, which exactly describes it?
Again ignorance talking with acceleration and deceleration for midway stops as well as speed bumps going through residential areas realistically there is no way you can travel 1000Km in three hour with a 350Km/h train. Realistically it would take around 6~7 hours. There is not going to be a non-stop 1000Km line since it will hurt ridership and again defeats the reason for having mass transit.
SamuraiBlue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2016, 09:44 AM   #1975
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuraiBlue View Post
Again ignorance talking with acceleration and deceleration for midway stops as well as speed bumps going through residential areas realistically there is no way you can travel 1000Km in three hour with a 350Km/h train. Realistically it would take around 6~7 hours. There is not going to be a non-stop 1000Km line since it will hurt ridership and again defeats the reason for having mass transit.

Currently the fastest Beijing-Shanghai train covers 1,318 km in 4 h 48 min (299 km/h average) and it has no stops between Beijing and Nanjing (1023 km). About an hour longer for services stopping in every possible station with train also in between these two extremes.
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2016, 09:57 AM   #1976
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,975
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuraiBlue View Post
Again ignorance talking with acceleration and deceleration for midway stops as well as speed bumps going through residential areas realistically there is no way you can travel 1000Km in three hour with a 350Km/h train. Realistically it would take around 6~7 hours.
Um? 1000 km does not take 6 hours even on a 270 km/h line!
The Nozomis on line Tokyo-Fukuoka cover 1069 km... and N1 takes 4:53.
6...7 hours? A Kodama travelling Tokyo-Fukuoka should take about this time... but for some reason, none seem to be scheduled.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuraiBlue View Post
There is not going to be a non-stop 1000Km line since it will hurt ridership and again defeats the reason for having mass transit.
There is. In China. Beijing-Nanjing is 1023 km, and has nonstop service.
It is not a 350 km/h line, just 300 km/h, and the trip time is 3:39.
Note that there are just 2 nonstop trains: G1 and G3, departing Beijing at 9:00 and 14:00 respectively. There are also 6 trains with a single stop (Jinan) and a total of 43 trains with more stops, up to 8 stops and 4:54 travel time. Nicely matching Nozomi.
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2016, 03:42 PM   #1977
00Zy99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,980
Likes (Received): 1507

In other words, if the whole line was built for 400 kph (as is seen in California), a 2 hour trip time from Tokyo to Hakodate might be feasible? Since two hours appears to be how long Japanese workers are willing to commute, that would obviously be a huge economic boom.
00Zy99 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2016, 03:58 PM   #1978
luacstjh98
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,359
Likes (Received): 288

Quote:
Originally Posted by 00Zy99 View Post
In other words, if the whole line was built for 400 kph (as is seen in California), a 2 hour trip time from Tokyo to Hakodate might be feasible? Since two hours appears to be how long Japanese workers are willing to commute, that would obviously be a huge economic boom.
THAT is something that would only happen with maglev.

Tokyo-Sendai or Tokyo-Morioka would make more sense at 360kph though.
__________________
Doors closing. Please stand clear of all train doors.

I have a bad habit of retroactively editing my posts without prior warning.
luacstjh98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2016, 04:15 PM   #1979
00Zy99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,980
Likes (Received): 1507

Which part is infeasible?

The speed?

The travel time?

What is the minimum travel time to Hakodate using traditional HSR?
00Zy99 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 16th, 2016, 11:07 AM   #1980
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,886
Likes (Received): 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by 00Zy99 View Post
Which part is infeasible?

The speed?

The travel time?

What is the minimum travel time to Hakodate using traditional HSR?
Both are infeasible. There is currently no economic way to travel faster than 320 km/h with the wheel-rail-system. And another system is unlikely to be built. There are also too many speed restriction along the way. For these reasons the travel time from Tokyo to Shin-Hakodate will not be shortened below the 4 hour mark.
__________________
Rippachtal.de
flierfy no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium