Delivering the railway infrastructure whose functionality is sustainable and uncompromised in terms of safety and availability under ever decreasing budget constraints is a great challenge. The successful accomplishment of this task relies on the effective management of individual assets within a wider whole system perspective. This is a highly complex decision-making task where mathematical models are required to enable well-informed choices. In this study, a novel modelling framework is proposed for performing the whole system lifecycle cost analysis. The framework is based on two models: railway network performance and costs. Using the former model investigations of the effects of decisions can be carried out for the individual asset and the whole system. A Petri net modelling technique is used to construct the model. A form of Monte Carlo simulation is then used to obtain model results. The infrastructure performance model is then integrated with the cost model to perform the lifecycle cost analysis. A superstructure example is presented to demonstrate the application of the approach. The results show that taking into account interdependencies among the intervention activities greatly influences, not only the performance of the infrastructure, but also its lifecycle costs and thus should be included in the cost analysis.

References

1. 1)
  - 1. Duncan, M.: ‘Whole life costing: completing the analysis: asset investment strategies, business planning and financing for infrastructure companies’. Asset Management Conf. 2011, London, UK, 30 November–1 December 2011.
2. 2)
  - 6. López-Pita, A., Teixeira, P.F., Casas, C., et al: ‘Maintenance costs of high-speed lines in Europe’. Transp. Res. Rec.: J. Transp. Res. Board, 2008, (2043), pp. 13–19 (doi: 10.3141/2043-02).
3. 3)
  - 5. Zhao, J., Chan, A.H.C., Stirling, A.B., et al: ‘Optimizing policies of railway ballast tamping and renewal’. Transp. Res. Rec.: J. Transp. Res. Board, 2006, (1943), pp. 50–56 (doi: 10.3141/1943-07).
4. 4)
  - 4. Andrade, A., Teixeira, P.F.: ‘A bi-objective optimization model for maintenance and renewal decisions related to rail track geometry’. Transp. Res. Rec.: J. Transp. Res. Board, 2011, (2261), pp. 163–170 (doi: 10.3141/2261-19).
5. 5)
  - 13. Andrade, A.R.: ‘Renewal decisions from a Life-cycle Cost (LCC) Perspective in railway infrastructure: an integrative approach using separate LCC models for rail and ballast components’. M.Sc. Thesis, Technical University of Lisbon (IST), Lisbon, Portugal, 2008.
6. 6)
  - 11. Rama, D., Andrews, J.: ‘A holistic approach to railway infrastructure asset management’, Int. J. Performability Eng., 2015, 11, (2), pp. 107–120.
7. 7)
  - 8. Wenjuan, Z., Wenbin, W., Yi, G.: ‘Maintenance strategy optimisation for infrastructure assets through cost modelling’. Working Paper. 2013. Coventry, University of Warwick, UK, WBS. http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/57720/, accessed 20 May 2014.
8. 8)
  - 2. Skinner, M., Kirwan, A., Williams, J.: ‘Challenges of developing whole life cycle cost models for Network Rail's top 30 assets’. Asset Management Conf. 2011, London, UK, 30 November–1 December 2011.
9. 9)
  - 12. BS EN 60300-3-3: Dependability management. Part 3-3: application guide – life cycle costing, 2004.
10. 10)
  - 10. Ajmone Marsan, M., Balbo, G., Conte, G., et al: ‘Modelling with generalized stochastic Petri nets’ (John Wiley & Sons, 1995).
11. 11)
  - 14. Network Rail Standard – Track Inspection, NR/L2/TRK/001/mod02, Issue 6, December 2012.
12. 12)
  - 16. Rama, D., Andrews, J.: ‘System-wide assessment of intervention strategies for railway infrastructure’. Eighth Int. Conf. on Modelling in Industrial Maintenance and Reliability (MIMAR), Oxford, UK, 10–12 July 2014.
13. 13)
  - 9. Murata, T.: ‘Petri nets: properties, analysis and applications’, Proc. IEEE, 1989, 77, (4), pp. 541–580 (doi: 10.1109/5.24143).
14. 14)
  - 7. Patra, A.P., Söderholm, P., Kumar, U.: ‘Uncertainty estimation in railway track life-cycle cost: a case study from Swedish National Rail Administration’, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. F: J. Rail Rapid Transit., 2009, 223, pp. 285–293 (doi: 10.1243/09544097JRRT235).
15. 15)
  - 3. Márquez, F.P.G., Lewis, R.W., Tobias, A.M., et al: ‘Life cycle costs for railway condition monitoring’, Transp. Res. E: Logist. Transp. Rev., 2008, 44, (6), pp. 1175–1187 (doi: 10.1016/j.tre.2007.12.003).
16. 16)
  - 15. Network Rail Standard – Inspection and Maintenance of Permanent Way, NR/L2/TRK/001/mod10, Issue 6, December 2012.

Railway infrastructure asset management: the whole-system life cost analysis

References

Related content