TCRP

Web-Only Document 77

Developing a Guide for Transit Traction Power Cables

Kasim A. Korkmaz
Eastern Michigan University
Ypsilanti, MI

Conduct of Research Report for TCRP Project C-24
Submitted January 2022

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.

The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.

The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.

Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.

The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major program divisions of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to mobilize expertise, experience, and knowledge to anticipate and solve complex transportation-related challenges. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 8,500 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation.

Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS

CRP STAFF FOR TCRP WEB-ONLY DOCUMENT 77

Monique R. Evans, Director, Cooperative Research Programs

Waseem Dekelbab, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs

Gwen Chisholm Smith, Manager, Transit Cooperative Research Program

Stephanie L. Campbell-Chamberlain, Senior Program Assistant

Natalie Barnes, Director of Publications

Heather DiAngelis, Associate Director of Publications

Jennifer J. Weeks, Publishing Projects Manager

TCRP PROJECT C-24
Field of Engineering of Vehicles and Equipment

Karl W. Berger, Berger Engineering, Centreville, VA (Chair)

Steven D. Bezner, Rockville, MD

Norma De La Garza-Navarro, N2 LLC, Dripping Springs, TX

John Jenifer, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, Washington, DC

Gordon D. Proctor, Gordon Proctor & Associates, Inc., Dublin, OH

Edward J. Rowe, LTK Engineering Services, Inc., Seattle, WA

Louis F. Sanders, Stevensville, MD

David F. Thurston, Canadian Pacific Railway Company, Calgary, AB

AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The research reported herein was performed under TCRP Project C-24, “Transit Traction Power Cables: Replacement Guidelines.” Eastern Michigan University (EMU) was the contractor for the research. Dr. Kasim Korkmaz, Associate Professor at EMU, was the Principal Investigator. During the data collection process, those in the traction power industry provided continuous support. The researchers would like to acknowledge the assistance of the transit industry personnel that made this research possible. For the survey/interviews and case studies, agencies generously shared their experiences and practices.

Table of Contents

Summary

Chapter 1. Introduction

1.1. Guide Structure

1.2. Research Approach

Chapter 2. Answers to Key Questions

2.1. Useful Life of Cables

2.2. Degree of Degradation

2.3. Detecting Degradation of Cables

2.4. Factors Influencing the Lifespan

2.5. Cost-Effective Methods to Extend the Life Span

2.6. Smart Replacement Strategy

2.7. Installation Concerns

2.8. Cable Failures Process

2.9. Conclusions

Chapter 3. Survey/Interviews

3.1. Survey Questions and Responses

3.2. Statistical Analysis

3.3. Model Analysis

3.4. Conclusions

Chapter 4. Case Studies

4.1. Case Study Structure

4.2. Case Study 1: Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority

4.3. Case Study 2: New Orleans Regional Transit Authority

4.4. Case Study 3: Bay Area Rapid Transit

4.5. Case Study 4: New York City Transit

4.6. Case Study 5: Amtrak Replacement Case

4.7. Case Study 6: Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon

4.8. Case Study 7: Utah Transit System

4.9. Case Study 8: Maryland Transit System

4.10. Case Study 9: Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

4.11. Case Study 10: Minnesota Metro Transit

4.12. Conclusions

Chapter 5. Cable Replacement

5.1. Cable Degradation Estimation for the Optimization Model

5.2. Cable Failure Rate Estimation

5.3. Process for Determining Optimal Cable Replacement Period

5.4. Finite Element Analysis

5.5. Conclusions

Chapter 6. Online Training

Chapter 7. Conclusions

References

Appendix A: Remarkable Responses from the Survey Study

List of Figures

Figure 1.1. Structure of the Guide

Figure 1.2. Guide Development Tree

Figure 1.3. Work Plan to Develop the Guide

Figure 1.4. Tasks in Phase 1

Figure 1.5. Tasks in Phase 2

Figure 4.1. Case Study Map

Figure 4.2. Amtrak 12kV Distribution (a) Amtrak MV Cable System, (b) Existing Square Duct Configuration

Figure 4.3. A Sample PILC Cable Failure

Figure 4.4. Transit Operations for Minnesota Metro Transit

Figure 5.1. Degradation Model for the Optimization Process

Figure 5.2. Finite Element Methodology for Cables

Figure 5.3. Stress Distribution on Strands under Tension, Torsion and Thermal Loadings

Figure 5.4. Process for Determining Optimal Cable Replacement Period

Figure 6.1. Training Material

Figure 6.2. A Sample Evaluation Form Submitted by the Attendees

List of Tables

Table 1.1. Chapter Summary Chart

Table 1.2. Key Questions and Responses for Guide Development

Table 2.1. A Summary for Literature Review

Table 3.1. Sample Participant Details for Data Collection Process

Table 3.2. Survey Details for Data Collection Process

Table 3.3. A Summary for Survey Answers

Table 4.1. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority

Table 4.2. New Orleans Regional Transit Authority

Table 4.3. Bay Area Rapid Transit

Table 4.4. New York City Transit

Table 4.5. Replacement of Amtrak’s 12kV PILC Traction Power Cables

Table 4.6. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon

Table 4.7. Utah Transit System

Table 4.8. Maryland Transit System

Table 4.9. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Findings and Required Actions

Table 4.10. Minnesota Transit System

Table 4.11. A Summary Chart for Case Studies