Athens, Conference Hall, Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and Networks, 5&6 November 2015 CATENARY FREE POWER SUPPLY SYSTEMS FOR TRAMWAYS - COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT R. Katkadigkas, C. Pyrgidis, AUTH

2 TITLE OF THE SLIDEPAPER OBJECTIVES Catenary free power supply systems for tramways instead of overhead catenary elimination of visual impact Analysis of the basic structural and functional features of the catenary free systems (ground power supply/ energy storage devices) Identification of the main advantages/disadvantages of the systems compared to the overhead catenary system Estimation of the implementation cost of the systems Comparative assessment

3 TITLE OF THE SLIDE Power supply categories used in railway networks Subcategories Overhead Line systems Trolley wire Overhead Catenary Catenary free Ground Supply 3 rd & 4 th rail APS Tramwave Primove Energy storage devices Supercapacitors Batteries Flywheels POWER SUPPLY Overhead Line System APS Primove Tram wave Batter is FLywh eels Super capaci tors Primove Batteri es Supercapa citors Flywhee ls Tramwave Batteries SUpercapa citors Flywhe els

4 TITLE OF THE SLIDEGROUND SUPPLY SYSTEMS Advantages Superiority in aesthetics Ability to perform activities that were prevented due to overhead wires Disadvantages Problems duo to weather conditions (ice, snow) High infrastructure costs Mechanical stress caused by road traffic Differences between the systems  Aps system has already been applied in practice  Tramwave and Primove able of energy recovery during braking  In Primove power supply is performed inductively APS Tramwave

5 TITLE OF THE SLIDE Average cost of an Overhead catenary system: €22.3 M/km APS COST ANALYSIS Overall investment of an APS system consists of: (a) Cost of power supply equipment : 7 times higher (b) Cost of rolling stock : 10-15% increase (c) Costs related to superstructure and substructure : 4 times higher According to Alstom: Double line of 12km length with 2 km APS 3% increase of overall investment Double line with 100% APS traction system 10% increase

6 TITLE OF THE SLIDE Percentage of the line length equipped with the APS system Average total implementation cost per track –km (€ M) 20%30 50%40,8 100%58,9 APS COST ANALYSIS City Total Length (km) Percentage of line length equipped with APS Operation starting date Cost million (€)/km Bordeaux4427.3% Tours % Angers % Reims1218.2% Orleans1221.2% Dubai10100%

7 TITLE OF THE SLIDE To exclude overhead catenary and reduce energy consumption ENERGY STORAGE DEVICES Batteries Supercapacitors Flywheels Batteries Supercapacitors Flywheels Mobile storage applications Stationary storage applications Stationary “back to the grid” applications Stationary “back to the grid” applications Energy storage devices Charging Procedure Regenerative breaking From the overhead catenary Ground or overhead infrastructure at stops Not fixed infrastructure SystemCompanyApplication casePower Supply ACRCAFZaragoza (2013) Overhead catenary + supercapacitors + batteries ACRCAFSeville (2011) Overhead catenary + supercapacitors + batteries CITADIS (NiMH)Alstom Nice (2007) Batteries + Overhead catenary Sitras HESSiemensDoha (2015) supercapacitors + batteries «CATFREE» driveSkoda Transportation Konya (2015) Batteries + Overhead catenary Primove batteries (Li- ion) Bombardier Nanjing -Hexi line (2014) Batteries (90%) + Overhead catenary at stops

8 TITLE OF THE SLIDE Catenary free power supply systems are considered as cutting edge technologies for tramways Great aesthetic advantage of the reduction of the visual annoyance from the overhead wires The number of tramways making use of these technologies will increase in the near future Not reliable cost analysis yet due to limited examples of real applications CONCLUSIONS

Athens, Conference Hall, Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and Networks, 5&6 November 2015