Transcript
i""
""""""""""""""""""""""""""I hereby declare: That except where reference has clearly been made to work by others, all the work presented in this report is my own work; That it has not previously been submitted for assessment; and That I have not knowingly allowed any of it to be copied by another student. I understand that deceiving or attempting to deceive examiners by passing off the work of another as my own is plagiarism. I also understand that plagiarising the work of another or knowingly allowing another student to plagiarise from my work is against the University regulations and that doing so will result in loss of marks and possible disciplinary proceedings against me. Signed ………………………………………… Date ………………………………………
Arriva Trains Wales Project: Our engineering business exists to provide excellent maintenance. Review our organisation structure and critically
appraise the strengths and weaknesses, citing alternative models
Glyn Frederick Lowen - 1265675
BEng Mechanical Engineering
April 2016
i""
Acknowledgements
First of all, I would like to express my thanks to Mr Ben Woods, without whom, this project
wouldn’t have happened. Also at Arriva Trains Wales, I would like to thank Mr Matt Prosser
and Mr Nick Di Maura, for their kind assistance whilst I was gathering information at the
Canton Depot.
Mr Simon Jarrett from Chiltern Railways provided continuous assistance from his kind
hospitality during my visit, to his help thereafter.
Finally, I would like to thank my friends and family for all assistance and advice received
throughout the project. Particular thanks must go to Mr and Mrs Lowen, who generously
gave their time and encouragement throughout the project. For this I am forever grateful.
Glyn"Frederick"Lowen" Cardiff"University" """"C1265675""
ii""
Abstract
This report was commissioned by Arrive Trains Wales (ATW), and has the aim of reviewing
their organisational structure, including analysis of the operation and organisation of the
depot, investigating strengths and weaknesses and citing alternative models. The findings and
recommendations gained from this project can be used for future work into depot efficiency.
A comprehensive literature review was carried out, researching into general business reviews,
moving into industrial maintenance, before thoroughly covering maintenance techniques,
backed up by external references wherever possible. A thorough study was made of ATW
and Chiltern Railways, investigating their various inputs to find how these affected their
outputs, which were principally train reliability, Public Perception Measure (PPM) and Miles
per Technical Incident (MTIN), although a study into the feasibility of measuring output
using an hours bought versus hours sold measure was also undertaken. Crossrail’s new Old
Oak Common depot was also investigated in part, to research aspects of a new purpose built
depot, which could advantage ATW in the future.
The findings from the study were used to conduct a thorough compare and contrast on both
ATW and Chiltern Railways. This in turn was used to draw conclusions; a number of
alternative models and recommendations for future work were made for ATW. It was
deemed that the inputs of Chiltern Railway’s Aylesbury depot were quantifiably stronger,
which was backed up by both its better PPM and MTIN. The new Crossrail Old Oak
Common depot was cited for several improvements for both ATW and Chiltern Railway’s
depots, mostly along the lines of technological advancement in predictive maintenance.
Glyn"Frederick"Lowen" Cardiff"University" """"C1265675""
iii""
Table 1 - List of Notations
Symbol Definition
ATW Arriva Trains Wales
MTIN Miles per Technical Incident
PPM Public Perception Measure
DPI Delay minutes Per Incident
TfL Transport for London
FPX Fuel Point Exchange
NR National Rail
AVIS Automatic Vehicle Inspection System
AIMS Asset Information and Management Service
IMechE Institute of Mechanical Engineers
UT Upward-facing technical
DT Downward-facing Technical
UP Upward-facing Personnel
DP Downward-facing Personnel
MTTF Mean-Time-To-Failure
CIPS Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply
SPM Shift Production Manager
ISO International Standard for Organisation
BSI British Standards Institution
Table 2 – Nomenclature
RS System reliability
λ Unit failure rate
Glyn"Frederick"Lowen" Cardiff"University" """"C1265675""
iv""
Contents 1.0)! Introduction 1 2.0)! Arriva Trains Wales 2
2.1)! Arriva Group 2 2.2)! Working with ATW 2
3.0)! Objectives and Time Scheduling 3 3.1)! Objectives 3 3.2)! Time Plan 3
4.0)! Background research 3 4.1)! What is a Business Review? 3 4.2)! The advantages of carrying out a Business Review 3 4.3)! Models for Industrial Maintenance 4
4.4) Maintenance Methods 5 4.5) Organisational Structures 9 4.6) Efficiency Measurement 11
4.7) Other Factors which can be used to Assess the Efficiency and Reliability of Train Depots 16
4.8) Machynellyth Depot Report 19 4.9) Quantifying Input Data 21 5.0) Assessment of Arriva Trains Wales, Canton Depot 21 5.1) Health and Safety at ATW, Canton Depot 22 5.2) Fleets at ATW 22 5.3) Fleet Reliability Data 22 5.4) Efficiency Calculations – A&B services 23 5.5) Efficiency Calculations – Major Components 24 5.6) Accuracy of the Data 26 5.7) Various Inputs for ATW 26 5.8) Summary of the Canton Depot 34 6.0) Chiltern Railways 35
6.1) Health and Safety at Chiltern railways 35 6.2) Fleets at Chiltern Railways 36 6.3) Fleet Reliability Data 37 6.4) Efficiency Calculations – A&B services 39
6.5) Efficiency Calculations – Major Components 40 6.6) Accuracy of the Data 40 6.7) Various Inputs for Chiltern Railways 40 6.8) Summary of the Aylesbury Depot 44 7.0) Crossrail Old Oaks Common depot 45
7.1) Key Features of the Crossrail Old Oaks Common depot 45 8.0) Compare and Contrast 47 9.0) Discussion 49 10.0) Conclusion 52 11.0) References 54 12.0) Appendix A – Record of Meetings 56 ""
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 1%
1.0) Introduction The title of this project was given by Arriva Trains Wales (ATW) (2016):
Our engineering business exists to provide excellent maintenance. Review our organisation
structure and critically appraise the strengths and weaknesses, citing alternative models.
This project was identified by ATW as a valuable research topic for the running of and continuous
improvement of their Canton train depot. The review of the organisation structure is a part of the
project. During the process of the project, ATW decided the scope of it should include examination
of the full range of issues relevant to the operation of the depot, including analysis of structure
organisation and maintenance approaches. This is alongside the appraisal of the strengths and
weakness and the citing of alternative models. Comprehensive background research was
undertaken, to assist with understanding alternative models, as well as to provide authenticity and
confidence to depot specific research undertaken later on in the project.
It investigates the strengths and weaknesses of ATW’s Canton depot, including looking at the
feasibility of data analysis of the efficiency of the depot, as well as looking at other efficiency
outputs. This, in turn, provides a basis for a comprehensive comparison with one of Chiltern
Railway’s depots, which is also part of Arriva group. In addition to this, Crossrail was investigated
with the viewpoint that they are a brand new depot, which is in the process of being built. This was
done in order to consider an alternative model of a purpose built depot, which can be looked at as an
‘ideal depot’, for the purpose of this project.
Information gained from comparisons with Crossrail along with initial research about train depot
maintenance best practice approaches will provide a basis for citing alternative models. A key
feature of this project was that it is undertaken from the perspective of an outsider, with little
experience in this field. This ensures an independent perspective, with no bias, prior knowledge or
presumption of results.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 2%
2.0) Arriva Trains Wales
2.1) Arriva Group History
Pre 1994, all railways in the UK were owned and operated by British Rail. Gradually, between 1994
and 1997, it was privatised. Valley lines and Wales & West took over the services for Wales. In
October 2001, Wales & Borderers took over services for most of Wales. Arriva trains came to
prominence on the 1st August 2003, when the Strategic Rail Authority awarded Arriva the new
franchise. This was awarded for 15 years, on the condition that performance reviews happened
every 5. Arriva fully took over the services on 7th December 2003.
Arriva Trains today
Arriva UK Trains limited oversees several train companies in the UK today. These include Chiltern
Railways and Arriva Trains Wales (ATW). In 2010, it was taken over by Deutsche Bahn, which
means Arriva UK Trains also oversees those companies formerly overseen by Deutsche Bahn Regio
UK Limited.
Canton Depot
ATW operates five maintenance depots in the UK. The largest is in Canton, Cardiff, which is where
it carries out the majority of its train maintenance. Woods (2016b).
2.2) Working with Arriva Trains Wales
For this project, the author was working under the direction of Mr Ben Woods, Head of Engineering
at ATW. Other people interviewed were Mr Matt Prosser, Engineering Director at ATW and the
shift production managers, who supervised and advised the author when he was at the ATW Canton
depot.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 3%
3) Objectives and Time Scheduling
3.1) Objectives
Several objectives were identified for this project, both by the author and Woods (2016).
a)! Carry out background research about engineering concepts relevant to the business, and how
a business review can be carried out.
b)! Conduct background research on how maintenance depots operate and how they can be
compared.
c)! Carry out a review of how the ATW maintenance depot at Canton operates.
d)! Compare and contrast with Chiltern Railway’s Aylesbury depot.
e)! Conduct a compare and contrast with the Crossrail Old Oak Common depot.
f)! Cite alternative models, as well as form a basis for future work.
3.2) Time Plan
The original time plan of the project is shown below. The green indicates what was being done and
the black indicates a break in the project due to examination period.
Table 1 – Initial time plan 4.0) Background Research 4.1) What is a Business Review?
A business review is a study, in depth,
of a business. It can be carried out in a
variety of different manners, depending
on the aim of the review. They are carried out for well established businesses, as well as newly
formed businesses, at all levels and in all aspects, in order to get a clear understanding of how the
business is run.
4.2) The advantages of carrying out a business review
•! Sets out the key areas of the business.
•! Clearly shows which areas are most efficient, and which are over/under resourced.
•! Sets out clearly the strengths and weaknesses
Objective Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr A B C D E F %
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 4%
•! Provides a clear platform against which alternative models can be compared.
•! Set out the tests and criteria against which the depots shall be assessed.
4.3) Models for industrial maintenance
4.3.1) Introduction to industrial maintenance management
Any company or business organization which relies on any sort of machinery, equipment or fleet of
vehicles will require maintenance of some sort to be carried out on them. Whilst there may be some
cost in both a time and financial sense, the benefits outweigh these in the vast majority of cases. A
lack of maintenance in a company’s fleet can cause unnecessary repairs, as well as lost profit. If a
piece of equipment or vehicle breaks unexpectedly, this can cause operational issues, both short and
long term.
Maintenance is an essential factor when the manufacturer is considering the product’s life cycle. As
can be seen in the flow chart below, the commissioning and operation of the product is a time when
the maintenance schedule is optimized and refined, as well as when continuous feedback is being
sent back to the design stage for future product consideration. Kelly & Harris (1978) Although the
flow chart below is just an example, it can be applied to a wide variety of industrial maintenance
situations.
Figure 1 - Industrial Maintenance Flowchart (Kelly & Harris 1978)
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 5%
As with any business, a big part of maintenance management is a balance of income and cost. A
decision has to be made as to whether the cost of setting up the depot, as well as the cost of running
it and putting the fleet through for maintenance saves money in the long run, in having to replace
fewer vehicles. There are a variety of things to look at, including formulae and equations that can
help decide the above.
4.3.2) Maintenance Depots
For companies that have a fleet of vehicles, in most cases transport operators, a maintenance depot
is essential. This is used to cycle their fleet of vehicles through for periodic maintenance. The
organisational structure, as well as the way in which a maintenance depot is run will form the main
body of this project, as a compare and contrast is carried out between ATW’s Canton depot and
Chiltern Railway’s Aylesbury depot. As a basis for comparing both to an ideal, the new Crossrail
depot at Old Oak Common shall be briefly looked at. As a brand new, custom built depot, this will
be close to ideal. Only certain aspects of it shall be looked at, due to it not yet being fully
operational.
4.4) Maintenance methods
This sub-section shall look at the different types of maintenance management. This is to give a clear
overview of each type, which can be referred back to when further on in the project. These are also
known as the 3 generations of maintenance; they have been developed over time. Woods (2016b).
4.4.1) Run-to-Failure Management
As opposed to spending money maintaining machinery at various points throughout its life, the
thought behind Run-to-Failure maintenance, is that, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” Mobley (1990).
This has been common practice in plant operations since the first plant was built. This essentially
means leaving the machinery to run until something breaks, then just fixing whatever has broken
when it does break to get the machine up and running again. The advantages to it are that a plant or
firm using run-to-failure management does not spend any money on maintenance until a machine or
system fails to operate, as explained by Mobley (1990). The downside to this is that in order to run
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 6%
it properly, a company must hold a stock of spare parts for all of its machinery all the time. Failure
to do this means a largely increased amount of downtime, as the delivery time of the new part has to
be added on to the repair time. As a result, when comparing maintenance types and looking at costs,
it is estimated that Run-to-Failure maintenance costs on average three times more than schedule or
preventative maintenance management. To summarise, whilst it worked well when industrial
maintenance was in its infancy, the system of Run-to-Failure management can be seen as less than
efficient.
4.4.2) Preventive Maintenance
As explained by Mobley (1990), preventative maintenance essentially means regular maintenance
of all sorts, which is known to actively prevent equipment and vehicle faults in specific areas. The
common aspect between all of these types of maintenance is that they are all based on time elapsed
since the start of the product, that is, they are time driven. The mean-time-to-failure (MTTF) is
often used to gauge when in a products life span to carry out preventive maintenance. Also defined
by Blanks (1992):
In a stated period in the life of a sample of items, the ratio of the cumulative time to the total
number of failures in the sample during the period, under stated conditions.
Also called a bathtub curve, it predicts that a new machine has a high chance of failure during the
first few weeks of operation, usually due to ‘teething’ problems. The chance of failure then goes
much lower for a long time, before going up again, as problems start again due to age. Maintenance
schedules are often based on a machines MTTF curve. A typical example of this is shown below in
figure 2.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 7%
An advantage of preventive maintenance is the fact that it is possible to arrange the repair for a time
when it will cause least disruption on usual operations. Arguably however, a disadvantage of using
MTTF statistics and thus preventive maintenance to schedule maintenance is that either unnecessary
repairs are carried out, or catastrophic failure occurs. As Mobley (1990) goes on to explain, analysis
of maintenance costs shows that repairs made after failure are normally three times as much in
terms of cost, as repairs made on a scheduled basis.
4.4.3) Predictive maintenance
The final maintenance type which shall be looked at for this project (although by no means the final
type overall) is predictive maintenance. Mobley (1990) defines it:
Predictive maintenance is a philosophy or attitude that, simply stated, used the actual
operating condition of plant equipment and systems to optimize total plant operation.
To put this in a different way, it requires operators to immediately replace or repair a part, when
they notice something isn’t quite right with the machine. This way, only those parts which need
replacing, get replaced and, ideally, only just before they fail to ensure maximum use of all parts.
As the name suggests, it also involves predicting using mileage information, when it is right for a
part to be changed. This is because parts need to be changed based on how many miles they’ve
Figure'2'–'Bathtub'curve'illustrates'the'life'cycle'of'a'specific'classification'of'machinery,'Mobley'(1990),'p4.''
'
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 8%
done, not based on what condition they’re in. As Mobley (2002) explains, there are five
nondestructive techniques which are often used for predictive maintenance management. These are:
•! Vibration monitoring
All machinery that has rotating or moving elements has potential for a vibration profile to be
obtained. This allows vibration based analysis techniques to be used for predictive maintenance.
•! Process parameter monitoring
Machinery must operate within acceptable efficiency parameters, or else risk limiting the efficiency
of the maintenance plant or depot. Process parameters should be routinely monitored during any
maintenance program.
•! Thermography
The emission of infra-red energy emitted from equipment is monitored by thermography
instrumentation. This determines operating condition in a number of cases.
•! Tribology
Mobley (2002) defines tribology as:
the general term that refers to design and operating dynamics of the bearing-lubrication-
rotor support structure of machinery.
Within the field of predictive maintenance, two primary techniques are used, lubricating oil analysis
and wear particle analysis.
•! Visual inspection
The main method of predictive maintenance, visual inspection is a simple yet essential method of
inspecting machinery and systems in order to identify any potential failures or maintenance related
problems.
In the past, predictive maintenance has been used solely as a tool and technique for maintenance
management, which is limited to, in the vast majority of cases, preventing unscheduled downtime,
as well as large failures. However, many more benefits can be derived from it, if the scope of the
program is expanded to be used as a maintenance optimization tool. This should reduce the total life
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 9%
cycle cost of critical systems, partly by extending their useful life. In addition to this, it should
eliminate unnecessary downtime, both scheduled and unscheduled plus any preventive and
corrective maintenance tasks that aren’t strictly needed. Mobley (2002).
4.5) Organisational structures
Business centered maintenance is explained by Kelly (1997) as a particular approach to
maintenance management; it’s based on an approach to achieve business objectives, which can then
be translated into maintenance objectives. Developing a maintenance strategy is essential, as can be
seen in Figure 3, as it provides a basis for forming a basic management process as in figure 4.
As for actually modeling administrative structures of
an organisation, an organogram can be made (figure
5). These show position titles, as well as each
position’s various responsibilities and lines of
communication. Although an organogram will
naturally differ between different organisations in
detail, there are some
guidelines, as explained by
Kelly (1997), shown in figure
5.
Figure 3 – A Methodology for developing maintenance strategy (Kelly,
1997)
Figure 4 – The basic steps of the management process (Kelly, 1997)
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 10%
•! Working from the bottom up, the supervisor has the responsibility of making sure that the
team’s work achieves the desired results. As a requirement of this responsibility, the
supervisor is given direct line authority over and decision
making within their team or area of responsibility. All of the
supervisor’s duties are delegated to them by the
superintendent, along with authority to carry out said duties
using the necessary resources. In having this role comes
increased responsibility, with the supervisor being accountable
to the superintendent for the results. As can be seen in figure
5, it’s the same further up the administrative structure, with
the manager holding authority over the superintendent, thus
delegating duties to them. The superintendent then has
responsibility for ensuring that these duties are carried out, (perhaps by delegating them
downwards), but then also is accountable for the results of said duties. Kelly (1997).
4.5.1) Roles of the professional engineer and the maintenance supervisor.
Within the study of ATW and Chiltern Railway’s depots, as engineering firms, staff can be broadly
placed into two categories, the professional engineer and the maintenance supervisor. This provides
background into the types of staff at each depot, which can be referred to later on, particularly when
looking at differences in organisational structures.
Professional engineer
Starting with the definition of ‘professional’, the characteristics of a true professional, defined by
Collins et al (1989) are:
1)! Custody of a clearly definable and valuable body of knowledge and understanding
associated with a long period of training
Figure 5 – Formal relationships in the administrative structure (Kelly,
1997)
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 11%
2)! A strong unitary organisation which ensures that the profession generally speaks with
‘one voice’
3)! Clearly defined and rigorous entry standards, backed up by a requirement to register
with the professional association
4)! An overriding responsibility to maintain the standards of the profession for the public’s
benefit.
Moving on to the engineer aspect, The Engineering Council (2016) defines professionally registered
engineers into three categories: Engineering technician, Incorporated Engineer and Chartered
Engineer. Although these differ in what they require in terms of qualifications and experiences, all
can be considered a professional.
Maintenance supervisor
Riddell (1989), cited in Kelly (1997, p65), considers maintenance supervisors represented by a grid
of duties:
Upward-facing technical (UT)
Downward-facing Technical (DT)
Upward-facing Personnel (UP)
Downward-facing Personnel (DP)
4.6) Efficiency measurement
There are several reasons for measuring and discussing efficiency and productivity. A few reasons
have been argued by Lovell (1993):
•! They are success indicators, performance measures, by which production units are
evaluated.
•! Only by measuring efficiency and productivity, and separating their effects from the effects
of the production environment, can we explore hypotheses concerning the sources of
efficiency or productivity differentials.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 12%
As explained by Houdmont (2011), before looking at efficiency measurement of depots specifically,
it is important to look at the two groups of techniques available for measuring efficiency generally.
Otherwise known as a performance measurement assessment, these are:
1) Parametric approaches
When discussing the performance of production units, it is common to describe them as being more
or less “efficient” or more or less “productive”, as described by Lovell (1993). There is much to be
discussed about the relationship between these two concepts, so only a few key, relevant techniques
shall be looked at.
Looking from a view of micro-economics theory, the production function can be interpreted as
forming the basis for a description of input-output relationships in a firm. (Fried et all 1993)
2) Non-parametric approaches
In its simplest form, efficiency can be defined as:
Efficiency = weighted sum of outputs/weighted sum of inputs.
There is no exact science to measuring the efficiency of maintenance depots. However, there are
certain measures that are used generally by engineering firms, explained by Mr Ben Woods (2016),
as it is essential to keep a gauge of how a depot is performing against other depots and indeed other
companies. Although companies obviously differ, depending on circumstances, comparisons can be
made using various methods. Firstly, certain criteria that were identified by Woods (2016) which
are commonplace in measuring efficiency are going to be examined.
Another point by Lovell (1993), highlighting the importance of measurement, is that in some cases,
“measurement enables us to quantify differentials that are predicated qualitatively by theory.” What
this means, is that measurement provides data, which will enable numerical analysis and
comparison. This is as opposed to qualitative comparisons provided by theory, which by its nature,
is more difficult to accurately analyse and compare, although any qualitative analysis will still be of
benefit.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 13%
What is important is to ensure that the comparisons made are consistent between companies. This
means ensuring that comparisons are made with all other factors the same, such as ensuring they are
using the same time period and same place relative to each depot and ensuring it is against fleets of
the same size. The following methods are generic ways of looking at how efficient a train depot is.
4.6.1) Cost
One thing that was identified as a comparison point was how much value for money engineering
companies are getting. Hours bought versus hours sold is a measure used to compare how many
hours a maintenance depot ‘bought’ in terms of labour, against how many of those hours bought
were actually used effectively. Woods (2016). In terms of looking at detailed cost analyses between
depots, whilst it would be beneficial to a project such as this, detailed financial analysis was deemed
by the author and Woods (2015) to go beyond the scope of this project and as such, whilst it may be
taken into consideration in a macro sense, detailed analysis shall not be carried out.
4.6.2) Availability (Downtime)
Availability looks at how much downtime a train has over a period of time, that is, time in which
it’s not available for profit making service. Train operators will typically have planned availability
for their trains, normally 86%, so that number of their trains will be available for use over a given
period of time. Woods (2016b).
4.6.3) Reliability
Reliability of trains is measured in a few different ways. This project considers two main methods
of reliability of train depots, both of which shall be explored, as they have been considered by
Woods (2016b) to be the most relevant. Whilst reviewing this, the author contacted the editor of
Modern Railways magazine, who gave notice of a feature in a back issue, on rolling stock
reliability, which is what this comes under.
Modern Railways magazine
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 14%
Modern Railways magazine has fifty years of experience behind it and has an established and well-
earned reputation as a trusted and highly respected journal in the railway industry. It is widely
known as being essential reading for railway professionals and as such, can be considered an
authoritative source.
Miles per Technical Incident (MTIN)
Modern Railways (2016) explain that one of the most common is Miles per Technical Incident
(MTIN). Using this measure, a ‘technical incident’ is defined as an incident that causes a delay of
three minutes or more. The MTIN target varies hugely between train companies. There are of
course, many factors that affect what a train company deems a suitable target.
Public Performance Measure (PPM)
As the name suggests, this measure is to do with the general public’s perception of the train
company as an efficient operator. Fleet performance is a large part of this. As well as that,
infrastructure, drivers and other factors all form this measure. PPM shows the number of trains that
arrive at their terminating station on time. ‘On time’ is defined as within 5 minutes for commuter
services and within 10 minutes for long distance services. PPM originated out of John Major’s
Citizen Charter in the 1990s. Abbott (2016). The PPM for all British train companies is published
by the Office of Rail and Road (2016). All train operators in the UK (as well as many in Europe),
have to publish their PPM for each fleet for each time period.
National Passenger Survey
This is a survey conducted annually, amongst all users of Britain’s railway service. It takes into
account things such as: cleanliness, reliability and customer service. It is conducted every year by
Transport Focus. Transport Focus is an organization that represents all users and consumers of
transport within the UK.
Every year, Transport focus (2016) conducts the NPS.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 15%
We consult more than 50,000 passengers a year to produce the National Rail Passenger
Survey (NRPS) - a network-wide picture of passengers' satisfaction with rail travel.
Passenger opinions of train services are collected twice a year from a representative sample
of journeys.
Passengers' satisfaction with thirty specific aspects of service plus overall satisfaction is measured
and therefore can be compared over time. However, clearly the most relevant parts of the survey are
those that are directly affected by the performance of the train depot. These are: reliability of the
train and upkeep and repair of the train. Obviously these have an effect on the overall satisfaction
with the company, so the percentage replying ‘satisfied or good’ for this measure shall be the one
compared. This is backed up by the fact that
reliability has the biggest impact on overall
satisfaction, as shown in figure six (NRPS).
Component reliability
Considering the reliability of individual
components within each unit, under the
guidance of Kelly (1997), the components
would come under series reliability. Kelly (1997) then goes on to explain series reliability. If a
system (a train for example), has x number of critical components, if just one of those components
fails, the whole system fails. Considering a simple system consisting of just two critical
components, figure 7 shows the flow diagram of this.
Kelly (1997) also explains
about equations that can be
used to estimate unit
reliabilities. The failure Figure'7'–'Series'connection'flow'diagram'(Kelly'1997)'
585.1 Key drivers analysis
5
What has the biggest impact on overallsatisfaction?
What has the biggest impact on overalldissatisfaction?
5.1 Key drivers analysis
■ Punctuality/reliability■ Cleanliness inside train■ Journey length (speed)■ Ease of getting on/off ■ Frequency of trains on the route■ Comfort of the seating area■ Others*
36%4%
5%
8%
8%
21%
18%
■ How train company dealt with delays
■ Punctuality/reliability■ Journey length■ Sufficient room for all to sit/stand■ Ease of getting on/off■ Others*
56%
7%
5%
4%
12%
16%
*Other factors included in ‘Others’ are all no more than 3% each
Figure 6 – Biggest Impact on Overall Satisfaction (NPS)
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 16%
properties of each component have to be assumed to be independent. That is, the failure rate of one
is not influenced by the other. If this is the case, then the expected unit reliability at any time, t is
given by the product of the estimated unit reliabilities at that time.
Rs(t) = R1(t) x R2(t) (1)
If λ is the unit failure rate, then:
(MTTF)s = 1/(λ1 + λ2) (2)
These calculations can be extended as needed, depending on the number of unit components.
4.7) – Other factors which can be used to assess the efficiency and reliability of train depots
Network Rail’s guidance notes
Network Rail produce a set of guidance notes and considerations, which can be used as benchmarks
for what ATW and Chiltern Railways should have available in their depots. These can be
considered as inputs towards the outputs of the depots, making them additional comparison points
for the compare and contrast. Prosser (2016b).
There are several design considerations affecting the design of a train depot, many of which are laid
out in Network Rail’s guidance notes. As well as that, there are a number of operational rules, to be
looked at, in order to gain an idea of how this affects the design of the depot. Some key
considerations and rules are laid out below. These shall be useful in investigating the ideal way in
which a train depot is designed, and will provide a useful basis for comparison with ATW and
Chiltern Railways.
4.7.1) - Key details of Network Rail’s design considerations
•! Road Access
•! Type of Servicing to be undertaken
•! Future proofing design
•! Servicing shed dimensions
•! Train operations and management
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 17%
•! Operator skill levels
•! Reduce carbon emissions
•! Energy conservation
•! Parts
4.7.2) - Processes
One feature which varies between train operators is the process for a train being brought in for
maintenance, which may be either planned or unplanned. It is arguable that using the space
available effectively and efficiently for the machines that need attending to, is one of the largest
engineering challenges for depots. Processes are most easily and often shown using a flow model.
Here a few example flow models shall be explored, to provide basis for comparison with ATW and
Chiltern. It is difficult to say what an ideal is due to the fact that they vary depending on a variety of
factors. However, by looking at a range, it should be possible to gain an idea of how the efficient
and effective flow models operate. This is effectively the basis behind any train depots’ schedule.
There is a balance between a huge number of factors, which vary between depots.
One way of getting it right is a solution provided by BMT Isis. This company provides a software
tool to simulate the operating efficiency of a train maintenance site. BMT Isis (2016) states the
advantages to this:
Given the parameters and the optimisation objective the simulation software will run
through every single possible combination of possibilities (normally more than once each)
until it finds the optimal solution with its associated cost and related benefit/improvement.
The author got in contact with BMT Isis, in order to find out more about what they do. Hankins
(2016) explained that the simulations tend to measure a wide array of different input variables, and
the parameters tend to be quite numerous. The models constructed help the user to modify the input
variables, throughout the whole range, which allows the results to be assessed and considered in
slow time. However, the output of models tend to form a direction of travel as opposed to a cut and
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 18%
dry solution. The input variables do provide a good basis for comparison as to what is used for a
particular process. These were: speed, manufacture time, employee shift patterns and stock levels.
4.7.3) – Facilities
Facilities in a depot depend on a huge number of variables and what is required in a depot of any
given size is laid out in Network Rail’s guidance notes above. However, there are a few main
facilities, which are particularly important in most train maintenance depots. These include: a
certain number of bays, a train wash and sufficient equipment for the technical staff to carry out the
work.
Procurement and supply management
Procurement and supply management is defined by CIPS (no date) “Procurement and supply
management involves buying the goods and services that enable an organisation to operate.”
There is little other guidance available on the supply management for train depots. This will be
looked at in more detail upon interview with ATW and Chiltern railways.
4.7.4) - Quality control
Quality control is an essential process, which ideally takes place where any product or service is
being provided. Quality control is defined as follows by Ishikawa (1990):
Quality control consists of developing, designing, producing, marketing and servicing
products and services with optimum cost-effectiveness and usefulness, which customers will
purchase with satisfaction. To achieve these aims, all the separate parts of a company must
work together. All the company’s departments must strive to create cooperation-facilitating
systems, and to prepare and implement standards faithfully. This can only be achieved
through full use of a variety of techniques such as statistical and technical methods,
standards and regulations, computer methods, automatic control, facility control,
measurement control, operations research, industrial engineering, and market research.
Although the above is a general definition of quality control, it can be applied to a train depot. The
maintenance and operation of the trains can be seen as the service.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 19%
4.8) Machynellyth Depot Report
Published on 9th November 2015, a report was conducted by Atkins, on the ATW depot at
Machynellyth. This report was used for Class 158 B examination work measurement at the
Machynellyth depot. This is one of ATW’s other train depots. The purpose of it was to look for a
timings exercise and any efficiency improvements that could be recommended on its Class 158 B
examination work. Atkins (2015). In essence, a time and motion study was carried out, analysing
exactly what the staff spent their time doing, and how effective it was.
4.8.1) Types of services at ATW
In order to understand the types of services undertaken at ATW and discussed in the Machynellyth
report, the author undertook an interview with Di Maura (2016), one of the SPMs at ATW.
FPX: The FPX is the Fuel Point Exchange and is where trains are refueled, which is mileage
dependent.
A services: The most basic service that is carried out at ATW. It is carried out every 5000 miles for
the 14X and every 5-7500 miles for the rest of the fleet. Consisting of the following: safety check,
cables check, brake block change, minor testing & repairs, oil change. This service takes 6-12 man
hours.
B services: Carried out every 20,000 miles on the 14X and every 30,000 miles on the rest of the
fleet. Consists of much more in-depth testing, all over the train, including CCTV operation, as well
as everything in the A service. This service takes 48 man hours.
Outsourced servicing: At ATW, the heavy maintenance is outsourced to Pullmans, who are also
based in Canton. Although the exact amount of downtime depends on the amount of heavy
maintenance required, typically, it can be through the workshop in 5 days.
4.8.2) Key changes made previously
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 20%
‘B examination’ job sheets
Previously, the B examination job sheets were printed out, in alphabetical order and distributed to
the teams in one package. This allowed jobs to essentially be ‘cherry picked’, which meant that all
the difficult jobs were left until the end of the whole B examination time period; as a result, ATW
had no idea of the time frame within which the work had been completed. Atkins (2015).
Changing the method solved this, so that the examination job sheets are regrouped to methodical
blocks. However, these changes still did not give a clear enough indication of the time for each task.
4.8.3) Key information from report
Throughout this report, a full time and motion study was carried out. This was undertaken using a
typical 158 B examination, which wasn’t too difficult, as it is a small depot, and there was a team
from Atkins to carry out the Machynellyth report.
It was noted that the staffing levels for this size depot were correct, and work was carried out
efficiently, with the exception of excessive relaxation breaks being taken. Repair levels were
excessive according to the report, but the report was only carried out on a single B examination, and
so can’t be representative of the whole fleet. Therefore, in terms of the whole depot, one cannot
have full confidence in the accuracy of the study. However, it does provide a gauge of reasonable
confidence and accuracy, based on that random examination.
4.8.4) Further recommendations of report
It is recommended in the report that trends in the repairs are investigated and analysed in order to
give a more accurate figure for future workload calculations.
Additionally, because A services contribute a great deal to the workload, a similar time and motion
study should have taken place for those and been included in the workload and staffing calculations.
This would have given increased confidence in the report.
4.9) Quantifying Input Data
One of the issues with carrying out a compare and contrast using inputs is that it is qualitative,
meaning it can be quite unclear as to which one is better and how they weigh up against each other.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 21%
In order to quantify each input, a scoring method shall be used, as shown by Ying (2016). Decision
making involving multiple criteria uses a process called Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). AHP is
based on a ranking structure, ranking each possible input or decision, according to how well each
decision meets the decision maker’s criteria. It uses a weighted average for each of the criteria, so
that the importance of each criteria is looked at relatively and judged according to its weighting, as
explained by Ying (2016). This method shall be used in the compare and contrast, to weight each
input in this way, according to how much of an effect it is deemed to have on the running of the
depot. In section 4.6, Lovell (1993), argued that the need for efficiency and measurement is that
they are effective performance indicators. As well as that, he argues the importance of quantifying
measurement, which backs up the need for AHP.
This section has met objectives A and B, with extensive background research about engineering
concepts relevant to this project.
5.0) Assessment of Arriva Trains Wales, Canton Depot
During the course of the project, several visits were made to the ATW Canton train depot. ATW
covers the majority of Wales, extending into Birmingham and the Midlands.
5.1) Health and Safety at ATW, Canton depot
Upon arrival at the Canton depot, the author was given a full depot induction. There are a few
essential PPE items that must be worn when walking around the depot. These are: high visibility
jacket and steel-toed boots. If the boots are not worn, then there is a particular route one has to
follow when moving around the depot. These health and safety rules were followed at all times
when visiting the depot.
5.2) Fleets
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 22%
ATW has fleets of the following train types, with the following amounts:
5.3) Fleet reliability data
The reliability of ATW’s fleet of trains is a very
strong measure of the depot’s efficiency and
strength. Such measures, such as MTIN and PPM,
were discussed earlier on in the report. The
individual MTIN and PPM for ATW shall be
looked at below. These can then be compared with
that of Chiltern Railways later on.
PPM
ATW’s PPM for 2016 period 2 was 95.3%, with a target of 93%. In addition to this, ATW have
started to assess depot efficiency using a new measure, Right Time Performance. As opposed to
PPM, which is defined as being within 5 minutes, RTP is the percentage that is dead on time. The
RTP for 2016 period 2 was 80.3%, with a company target of 83%.
Availability
There was no availability data provided by ATW, rendering it ineffective as a comparison measure.
MTIN
36*2 Number of Cars Max Speed
142 15*2 75 mph
143 15*2 75 mph
150 36*2 75 mph
153 8*2 75 mph
158 24*2 90 mph
175 27 (11 x 2Car & 16 x 3Car)
100 mph
%
Table 2 – ATW Fleet (ATW 2016)
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 23%
As can be seen in the table, for over half of its fleets, the MTIN target for 2016 period 2 is not met.
In addition to this, ATW is only ‘best in class’ for the 143 fleet, with regards to the MAA.
National Passenger Survey
For the time period of Autumn 2015, 83% of passengers gave a rating of ‘satisfied or good’ for the
train. This provides another comparison with Chiltern Railways for the compare and contrast.
5.4) Efficiency calculations – A & B Services
In this section, the calculations shall be described that are used to calculate the efficiency for Arriva
Trains Wales. The efficiency shall be worked out using hours bought versus hours sold, which is a
method suggested by Woods (2016a). As the Head of Engineering at ATW, this was worth looking
into. This is done by knowing how many man hours are ‘bought’ by the depot each week. This is
worked out by the total number of staff, multiplied by the number of hours each of them are
contracted to work each week. Hours sold looks at how many of those hours are effectively utilized.
This can be done by looking at how many services were completed in each time period, and looking
at how many hours were taken per service do this.
Other sources for ‘bought vs. sold method
Looking at the assessment conducted on the Machynellyth depot by Atkins can back up this
method. The report looked in depth at time and motion studies of the technicians undertaking the B
exam, which is an essential requisite for conducting an accurate efficiency calculation.
‘Bought vs. Sold method applied to ATW Canton depot
Class Period MTIN
Target for end
2016
ATW
MAA
Best in Class
142 10,102 7,384 7,090 Northern: 7,256 143 3,622 7,406 6,370 ATW: 6,370 150 7,701 7,010 6,945 LM: 11,691 153 8,015 7,187 6,437 LM: 21,456 158 7,230 8,867 7,383 EMT 12,121 (excluding SWT) 175 16,276 20,000 18,299 -
LHCS 3,198 5,000 4,119 - %
Table 3 – ATW MTIN Data (ATW 2016)
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 24%
There are three different types of services which happen on the trains, A. B and C, which take 6, 60
and 600 man hours respectively. By looking at the services completed and comparing the hours
used (or ‘sold’) to the hours bought, the efficiency of the workers in the depot can be worked out,
which leads to discovery’s of how much value for money the company are getting.
The efficiencies for the following time period have been worked out below in table four. As can be
seen, the efficiency varies week by week, but always remains under 50%. Before taking a look at
reasons behind this, the efficiencies with the major components were calculated.
5.5) Efficiency calculations – Major components
As well as A and B services, the efficiencies behind the major components can also be looked at.
These can be seen in the spreadsheet below, along with the various efficiencies for each time
period. It can be seen in the table that some of them are highlighted in red. These are the ones that
were unplanned, and may have caused a delay due to obtaining parts, as for the majority of tasks,
parts are ordered on an ad hoc basis. As well as that, it may have some effect on the efficiency.
Table'4'–'Efficiency'calculations'for'A'&'B'services'
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 25%
Time%Period% Change%Date% Component%Man%Hours%taken/Hours%sold%
New%Efficiency%(%)%%
2015/07'
27/07/15' Gearbox' 72'
30.2'
27/07/15' W/set'Master' 72'27/07/15' W/set'Slave' 72'28/07/15' W/set'Trailer' 72'31/07/15' W/set'Power' 72'
Total%Man%hours%for%time%period% 432'Total%Hours%Sold% 3624'
2015/08'
05/08/15' Engine' 72'
36.1'
10/08/2015' W/Set'Trailer' 72'12/08/2015' Engine' 72'14/08/2015' Engine*2' 144'17/08/2015' W/Set'Power' 72'24/08/2015' W/Set'Slave' 72'25/08/2015' Engine' 72'27/08/2015' W/set'Trailer' 72'Total%Man%hours%for%time%period% 720'
Total%Hours%Sold% 4332'
2015/09'
05/09/2015' Engine' 72'
37.9'
07/09/2015' W/Set'Trailer' 72'09/09/2015' Engine' 72'10/09/2015' Engine*2' 144'20/09/2015' W/Set'Trailer' 72'20/09/2015' Gearbox' 72'24/09/2015' Gearbox' 72'29/09/2015' Engine' 72'30/09/2015' Engine' 72'Total%Man%hours%for%time%period% 864'
Total%Hours%Sold% 4548'
2015/10'
06/10/2015' Engine' 72'
30.1'
07/10/2015' Engine'*2' 144'07/10/2015' Engine' 72'07/10/2015' Engine' 72'
10/10/2015'Voith'Power'Wset' 72'
10/10/2015' W/Set'Trailer' 72'10/10/2015' Gearbox' 72'12/10/2015' Engine' 72'15/10/2015' W/Set'Power' 72'15/10/2015' Engine' 72'15/10/2015' Gearbox*2' 144'Total%Man%hours%for%time%period% 936'
Total%Hours%Sold% 3612'%
Table'5'–'Efficiency'calculations'for'major'components'
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 26%
As can be seen from the data, the efficiencies are constantly below 50%. This is significantly lower
than it should be, according to Prosser (2016). There is some debate as to the accuracy of the data
provided. At the moment, there has not been a time and motion study for the ATW Canton depot, so
it is difficult to ascertain how accurate these efficiencies are. As an additional measure, it was
decided to investigate the inputs for both ATW and Chiltern that lead to the same output, which is
getting the trains maintained on time and to the required quality.
5.6) – Accuracy of the data
Due to the fact that the accuracy of the data has been questioned by Prosser (2016), it is worth
looking at why it may be inaccurate. It is noted by Bishop (2016) that “These are ballpark figures as
we still need to carry out a time & motion study.”
That said, Prosser (2016) made the point that estimated figures have come from somewhere, so it is
still worth using the data as a basis for comparison, with that perhaps taken into account. As well as
that, the data can be used in a future study, in order to provide a guide to compare with more
accurate data, as well as to be used as a basis for running time and motion studies.
5.7) Various inputs for ATW
During a meeting at the Chiltern depot, Prosser (2016) made the point that for each depot, the
various inputs and the differences between them would affect how easily and well the output is
achieved, which is getting the train maintenance done. A quantitive way to measure the output is to
use reliability figures such as PPM and MTIN. These various inputs can be explored for each depot
and validated using the background research.
5.7.1) Processes Used
At the time of writing, ATW Canton depot was changing from one system to a new system for its
process of getting the trains into the depot and maintained, as discussed in section 4.7.2). This
provides an insight into what could be a major strength or weakness in ATW. The change in the
processes was explained by Woods (2016).
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 27%
Old System
The old system was what was known as reactive maintenance. Woods (2016a) explains how this
process happened via the various heads of departments, there being multiple job roles involved in
getting a train in for maintenance.
Head of Engineering
The Head of Engineering was responsible for dealing with changes to the train’s
specification, documentation and drawings following the introduction of new legislation,
obsolescence, emerging safety and reliability issues. The emphasis was on keeping the fleet
safe and reducing delay minutes, a result of train failures.
Head of Procurement
The Head of Procurement (Reporting to Finance Director) was responsible for the provision
of materials for maintenance and repairs. The emphasis was on reducing cost and stock
holding.
Head of Production
The Head of Production (South) & Fleet Manager (North) split the principle train
maintenance between them. Each had responsibility for planning and undertaking the
maintenance of its own ‘home’ fleets as well as the maintenance of sites and training of
people. The emphasis was on start of day availability. Both were measured on their outputs
rather than the way in which they accomplish them. This led to quality being compromised
to meet production output targets, with the ability to change the plan so that each location
could make parochial decisions that impacted the other location.
Di Maura (2016) added that whilst there always was a planning element involved, the services were
planned so that a service was due a set amount of time before it was due according to mileage, in
order to allow excess mileage to get the train back to the depot if needed. In the majority of cases,
this would result in the train being serviced before it was needed according to mileage, which was a
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 28%
waste of resources and resulted in not getting the potential mileage out of each interval. In essence,
it was suggested that the old system was a lot more sporadic and inefficient, which resulted in
wasted resources.
New System
The new system is much more of a planning based maintenance system, a proactive approach. What
this means, explained by Di Maura (2016), is that the depot can request trains are put on certain
diagrams, in order to use up the mileage left until the next service in a much more effective manner.
It also means that they can predict when trains will be due for servicing, as they will know how
much mileage they will do in a certain time period. This will assist in predictive maintenance, as
discussed in section 4.4.3. In theory, this should reduce the number of unplanned failures, as the
trains shall be on the correct diagram, so they’re already at the correct depot when a component
needs changing. This should also prolong the life of the components as much as possible. Woods
(2016a) explains this from the perspective of the job roles as follows.
Head of Engineering
The Head of Engineering is still responsible for dealing with changes to the train’s specification,
documentation and drawings following the introduction of new legislation, obsolescence, emerging
safety and reliability issues. The emphasis is on proactively keeping the fleet safe and reducing
defects, which result in delay minutes. The position is now also responsible for Quality and
Training. Woods (2016).
Head of Procurement
Procurement is now centralized at Arriva Group, for all the companies underneath it. Local
responsibility for stock levels and parts are given to each Fleet Production Manager. Advantages to
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 29%
this include the ability to see stock group wide, which enables an overview of the distribution of
parts. Di Maura (2016) added that group based ordering for major components ensures much better
purchasing power, which results in better value for money.
Head of Production
The Head of Production is now responsible for executing the plan to the specification at all ATW
locations. The focus is now on getting the most out of their resources in the allotted time. A healthy
tension now exists as it is in production’s interest to challenge unworkable plans.
Between the two descriptions of the new system, it can be seen that there is much more of an
emphasis on being efficient and getting the most value for money, not only within the depot, but
group wide.
Di Maura (2016) explained that this new system will ensure that in theory, the trains will get back
into the depot just as the mileage interval runs out, ensuring that they are being run to their full
potential between intervals.
Fuel Management
At ATW, all trains are refueled when brought in for service. In addition to this, they can be refueled
at other points along the network, when needed, which is done with the new planning process as
discussed above, to ensure they use up their mileage interval as much as possible before being
refueled.
5.7.2) Facilities & Suitability
There are eight bays at the Canton depot. As well as that, there are workstations around the depot,
containing generic materials. Each member of technical staff is issue with an individual toolkit,
which is used for the majority of tasks.
Parts
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 30%
The parts storage at ATW is done on an ad hoc basis. As looked at above, and explained by Di
Maura (2016), under the old system, this could pose a problem, as there was not sufficient planning
before bringing a train in, which resulted in delays in ordering and acquiring new parts.
Suitability
As explained by Di Maura (2016) ATW’s Canton depot originally started off as a local stock depot,
after which it was transformed into a depot for intercity trains. Inter-city trains were a lot longer,
which explains the design of the depot today, in its length. Today, it services the ATW fleet, which
is not suited to its length. As a result, delays are caused due to the fact that a number of trains can be
on the same line in the depot at a time, and the trains in the middle can be delayed in getting out, as
they have to wait for the train in front to finish servicing. As looked at in section 4.7.1, this does not
meet Network Rail’s design considerations, as the servicing shed dimensions are not fit for purpose.
Automatic inspection equipment
As of the moment, ATW do not have any Automatic inspection equipment at their Canton depot.
However, as explained by Di Maura (2016), they’re getting an automatic laser tyre measurement
system installed. This will enable predictive maintenance, as talked about in section 4.4.3.
5.7.3) Quality Control
As explained by the Di Maura (2016), there are two ways in which the quality of the servicing is
checked at the ATW Canton depot:
•! Random checks by technical inspectors
There are four technical inspectors at ATW, currently. They are all CAT 4 qualified, with several
years’ experience as well. They conduct random checks on maintenance, in order to ensure all of
the servicing is completed to the correct standard.
•! Train MOTS
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 31%
A train MOT is conducted after every B examination, in order to ensure the work has been
conducted in the correct manner. As discussed in section 4.7.4, this meets Ishikawa’s (1990)
definition of quality control, because clear standards are being faithfully implemented.
5.7.4) Organisation & Staff
Organisation of ATW
The organisational structure of ATW has recently undergone a change, as explained by Prosser
(2016a). The structure changed from the 2015 functional review. Following the resignation of Head
of Fleet (South), ATW used the opportunity to review the fleet organisation. The main aims of this
are to:
•! Move to a more matrix organisation with more balanced accountabilities and responsibilities
•! To achieve the vision.
The vision is to become “A professional maintenance provider – planning led, production
focused”, as defined by Prosser (2016a). This can be seen as an effective approach to
maintenance management, as looked at in section 4.5. Kelly (1997) talks about translating
business objectives into maintenance objectives. The above quote by Prosser (2016) can be seen
as the business objective, whilst the maintenance objectives were also set out by Prosser (2016a)
as follows:
•! Assured availability
•! No fire-fighting – proactive and in control
•! Workload and resources matched
•! Right train in the right road, work defined, with the right materials and skills
•! Improved availability of key materials
•! Productivity assured, measured and improved
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 32%
In section 4.5, Kelly (1997) also spoke about the basic steps of the management process, which are
Function, Objective, Plan, Organisation. The above can be seen to apply to this, with the
organisation part looked at below.
Key issues of current organisation
•! Planning and delivery sit in the same reporting line.
•! Limited materials involvement in planning.
The new organisation addresses these issues. The differentiation between engineering professionals
and maintenance supervisors can be seen in the above structures. In terms of when they become
‘professional engineers’, this remains in accordance with The Engineering Council (2016) in
section 4.5.1. However, the opportunity is there to gain qualifications at all stages. In addition to
this, there is no requirement to be a Chartered Engineer at any of the stages. There’s little detail into
the staff at lower levels. The reasons behind this are unknown, however, not specifying it allows for
flexibility between staff roles.
Operator Skill Levels
ATW uses workers at a variety of skill levels to carry out its maintenance. They have recently
started an apprenticeship scheme; apprentices in the 2nd year of the scheme are put on shift on the
%% %
Figure 8 - Current Organisation% Figure 9 - New Organisation%
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 33%
shop floor. The majority of the fleet technicians on the shop floor are either CAT 3 or CAT 4
qualified. CAT 3 is known as ‘semi-skilled’ and cover things such as oil and water changes. CAT 4
are fully skilled and are fully qualified electricians and fitters. Another category of staff is technical
inspectors, of which there are four currently at ATW’s Canton depot. Technical inspectors are
experienced staff, whom are all CAT 4 qualified. They will randomly check servicing on trains, to
ensure it is up to the required standard.
Drivers
One key issue highlighted by Di Maura (2016) was that technicians are only qualified to drive the
trains up and down a basic length of line, and not across points or signals, which hugely limits the
amount by which they can be moved around the depot. Ideally, the depot would have 4 fully
qualified drivers dedicated to helping the maintenance team, on duty every night. However, at the
moment, the SPM has to ‘borrow’ qualified drivers in for assisting in moving the maintained trains
around. Often, they only end up with one, which causes delays with maintenance.
Environmental policy
Di Maura (2016) explained what ATW are currently doing in order to keep up an effective
environmental policy.
•! ISO 1800 legal standards are all met.
•! Segregated waste to avoid contamination and ensure safe disposal of oils.
•! Most lights in the depot have sensors to ensure they are only on when needed.
•! Recycling is in use.
•! Rainwater harvesting provides water for a number of toilets around the depot.
All this led to ATW being awarded the Green Dragon Award, awarded to organisations in Wales
who meet a set environmental standard. The advantages to this are clear. An environmentally
friendly depot uses fewer resources, enable lower outgoings, as well as improved public image.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 34%
5.8) Summary of the Canton Depot
5.8.1) Strengths
Environmental policy
As explained previously, ATW have a firm and comprehensive environmental policy in place. This
meets Network Rail’s design criteria and provides strength to the efficiency of this business.
Location with regards to rail network
The Canton depot has a good location and rail access. Due to the way in which the ATW routes are
run, the vast majority of the trains are taken in overnight for servicing, which means good access is
essential, to allow effective operation.
Organisational structure
As looked at previously, the organisational structure provides a clear backbone to the business. In
addition to this, confidence in its proficiency is shown by the evidence. The evidence is backed up
by the background research.
Process
As looked at in section 5.7.1, the new ATW process is a huge advantage to them. Essentially, it
ensures that the maximum usage is being achieved by the trains, which increases the efficiency of
the depot.
5.8.2) Weaknesses
Design (adapted from old railway shed)
As looked at in section 5.7.2, the ATW Canton depot was originally designed for the inter-city
trains, which were a lot longer. As a result, the design of the depot today is not suited to the current
ATW fleet.
Parts storage
The current ATW parts storage is insufficient.
No redundant space
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 35%
There is a lack of redundant space at the ATW Canton depot. Whilst not a major issue at present, it
could be in the future with fleet development. Di Maura (2016).
6.0) Looking at Chiltern railways
The author made a visit to Chiltern Railway’s Aylesbury depot, on 24th March 2016. This visit was
made to Mr. Simon Jarrett, the Engineering Director at Chiltern Railways. The purpose of the visit
was to gather information and data about Chiltern Railways, as well as the gain an insight into the
depot, in order to conduct an effective compare and contrast. All data and information acquired
from Chiltern Railways is to be kept confidential, as requested by Jarrett (2016): “This information
is provided solely for the purpose of your university project and should not be passed to others
outside of the university, Arriva Trains Wales or Chiltern Railways.”
About Chiltern Railways
Chiltern Railways were franchised in 1996. Prior to that, when the railways were privitised in the
1990s, most ended up being run by established transport groups. Chiltern’s however, went to a
management buyout team, whose bosses were innovative and entrepreneurial, ploughing money
into the network and attracting new customers, largely due to expanding it out to Birmingham. The
Economist (2014).
Routes of Chiltern Railways
Chiltern Railways serves much of the London area, all from Marylebone. The Aylesbury line goes
as far as Aylesbury Vale Parkway station. In addition to this, the line to Birmingham serves much
of the area up there, with some new and occasional routes being planned.
6.1) Health and Safety at Chiltern railways
Upon arrival at Chiltern railway’s Aylesbury depot, a full site induction was carried out. Certain
health and safety measures were carried out. These included: PPE equipment, consisting of High
visibility jacket being worn at all times whilst in the working area of the depot, Walkways around
the depot and fire drill procedure. Upon signing the visitor’s book, a read of the Health and Safety
instructions was required and confirmation required that they were understood.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 36%
All depot health and safety measures were followed at all times.
6.2) Fleets at Chiltern Railways
However, there are two fleets in particular which are going to be looked at for the purposes of this
project from Chiltern Railways. This is because they are closely comparable to two particular ATW
fleets, meaning an effective compare and contrast can be carried out. These are the class 165 fleet
and the class 168 fleet, which are comparable to ATW’s 158 and 175 fleets. In addition to this, both
these fleets are maintained at the Aylesbury depot, which was visited by the author.
Class 165 fleet
The class 165 is directly comparable to ATW’s class 158 fleet. It was built in the early 1990s, with
a refurbishment in the early 2000s. The fleet is mainly used on commuter journeys, less than 1 hour
in duration, covering around 100,000 miles per year. The Aylesbury depot, which was visited by the
author, was built with the 165 fleet in mind. The Wembley depot has the ability to maintain all
fleets, but was not visited by the author. A 3rd depot is in the process of being built.
Type%of%Service% Mileage% Limiting%factor%
FRX' 1200' Fuel'tank'capacity'
A'Exams' 5000' Break'pads'
B'Exams' 30,000' Engine'oil'life'
Engine' 400,000' Engine'Warranty'
Gearbox' 500,000' Gearbox'warrenty'
C4' 800,000' Axle'bearing'life'%
Table'6'–'Service'data'for'Class'165'(Chiltern'Railways'2016)'
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 37%
Class 168 Fleet
The class 168 is directly comparable to ATW’s class 175 fleet. It uses 24 units of 2, 3 and 4 car
formation, totaling 77 vehicles. It was built from 1998 – 2005 and is mainly used on longer distance
journeys, covering around 190,000 miles per year. As explained by Jarrett (2016), and can be see in
table 8, the B exams are time based. This is due to the fact that the 168 fleet are more critical to the
business, and the maintenance intervals being time based makes what is a crucial service, much
easier to control. As for the wheel sets, the wear on the wheels are constantly monitored, using
predictive maintenance technology looked at later on, and so they are replaced only when they need
to be.
Other Chiltern Railway fleets
Class 172 – This fleet consists of four units of 24 car formation, totaling eight vehicles. It was built
in 2011 and is mainly used on medium distance journeys, covering 140,000 miles per year.
Mk 3 – Cl68 locomotives haul the trainset. There are 5 trainsets, in an 8-car formation, totaling
forty vehicles.
6.3) Fleet Reliability Data
PPM
Chiltern railways have a PPM target of 94.96%. Throughout 2016 Period 2, that is, 7th February to
5th March, their period PPM was 96.14%, exceeding their target, despite variance on different days,
as can be seen on figure 9.
Type%of%Service% Mileage% Limiting%factor%FRX' 1500' Fuel'tank'
A'Exams' 5000' Break'pads'
B'Exams' timebased'U'12'weeks' Engine'Oil'
Engin'&'Gearbox' 450,000' Warranty'
Bogies' 1,000,000' Components'
Wheelsets' As'long'as'possible' Wheel'life'%
Table'7'–'Service'data'for'Class'168'(Chiltern'Railways'2016)'
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 38%
MTIN
MTIN is measured per fleet as opposed to for the whole company. The target for both the 165 and
168 fleets are 13,000 miles. The actual MTIN for each is 9792 and 17131 respectively. These can
be compared against the target and MTIN (MAA) in figures 10 and 11.
Availability The availability for Chiltern Railways is measured against vehicles available. For the 165 and 168 fleets, it is 98.9% and 97.8% respectively.
7,000%
9,000%
11,000%
13,000%
15,000%
17,000%
19,000%
MTI
N
Time Period
Figure 10 - MTIN Variance for Fleet 165 (Chiltern 2016)
Target
MTIN%(Actual)MTIN%(MAA)
%
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 39%
National Passenger Survey
In the Autumn 2016 NPS, Chiltern railways scored 80% of participants satisfied or good with the
train, and a score of 82% overall satisfaction with the journey. Chiltern railways do not currently
have a target for NPS, so can only be looked at in comparison to ATW.
Right Time Performance
Chiltern railway’s Right Time Performance for 2016 period 2 was 84.66%. They do not currently
have a target.
6.4) Efficiency Calculations – A&B services
Jarrett (2016b) explained the times taken for each of the services done by Chiltern railways, which
are summarised in table 4 and can form the basis of the efficiency calculations.
%
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 40%
As explained by Jarrett (2016a), Chiltern railways manage staff hours in a different way to ATW.
As opposed to set teams coming in every night to conduct the majority of the maintenance
overnight, there are various teams, each headed up by a supervisor. Due to the fact that Chiltern’s
trains are maintained at various different times, depending on the diagrams, it is difficult to
accurately compare hours bought vs. hours sold between the two companies, making this a non-
effective efficiency comparison measure. As well as that, the variance in what is involved in each
type of service makes it difficult to do an accurate comparison.
6.5) Efficiency Calculations – Major Components
Similarly, with regards to the major component changes, the data that was gathered for Chiltern
railways was in a remarkably different format to ATW’s data. Therefore, it was decided not to use it
for the comparison, as it would not be an accurate measure.
6.6) Accuracy of the Data
Whilst a lot of the data can be considered accurate, the time taken for services, like with ATW,
approximate figures, so cannot be considered hugely accurate.
6.7) Various inputs for Chiltern railways
6.7.1) Processes Used
Predictive Maintenance
Although not all in the Aylesbury depot, Chiltern railways uses a variety of methods to monitor and
therefore predict failure of wheel tread, axle bearings and break pads, all part of the wheelset. This
'Table'8'Q'165'Fleet'Service'Data'Type%of%Service%
FPX% A% B% Engine%&%Gearbox%
C4%
Time%taken%(man%hours)%
1%% 1.5% 24%% 32% Bombardier%outsourced%
%Table'9'Q'168'Fleet'Service'Data'
Type%of%Service%
FPX% A% B% Engine%&%Gearbox%
Bogie%&%wheelsets%
Time%taken%(man%hours)%
1% 1.5% 144% 32% 32%
%
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 41%
is known as condition based monitoring. Each wheelset costs around £5000 each, which adds up to
about £4 million across the fleet. For this reason, Chiltern railways put a lot of emphasis on not
changing the wheelset until absolutely necessary. The actual cost is a lot greater since a lot of
maintenance is linked to wheelsets. (Jarrett 2016a). These are examples of non-destructive
techniques of predictive maintenance, talked about by Mobley (2002) in section 4.4.3.
Atlas FO – Wheel tread defects
The Atlas FO wheel tread monitoring system, owned and used by Chiltern railways is the only non
NR owned Atlas FO installation in the country, and is
positioned on the up line at Wembley stadium (Jarrett 2016a).
He also shows that it consists of fibre optic wheel sensors,
which measure wheel loads, along with an AVI tag reader and
a computer. It detects defective wheels and any diagonal
loading abnormalities. This allows earlier detection of flats
and cavities in the wheel, which limits the depth of damage in
the wheel.
TADS – Axle Bearing Health
Chiltern railway’s TADS system is the first permanently installed one in the UK. It monitors axle
bearings as trains go past, with the data reviewed daily. Due to the position of the system on the up-
line at Wembley stadium, AVI tag data from the Atlas FO is used. Work is underway to expand the
acoustics, in order to find final drive bearing defects and other faults.
PadView – Brake Pads & Brake actuators
PadView is an automated system used to measure wear on the break pads. The results are constantly
monitored, with alerts if they fall below a certain level.
Jarrett (2016b), explained that the PadView in particular, makes it much easier to predict amount of
downtime due to an A service.
Figure 12 – Train Wheel Tread%
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 42%
Fuel management
At Chiltern railways, the train diagrams have multiple fuel points at various places along them.
Trains are allocated to particular diagrams daily, with fuel levels taken into consideration, to ensure
that they pass a fuel point on diagram when they need it.
Although predictive maintenance is used, and does involve the use of IT to an extent, the process of
getting a train in for maintenance at Chiltern’s Aylesbury depot is not computerised, as explained
by Jarrett (2016b).
Process
As for the process of getting the trains in for servicing, every day the trains are allocated a diagram,
ensuring that they pass through an FPX when needed on the diagram. The train’s mileages are
tracked, to ensure they come in at the correct time for servicing.
6.7.2) Facilities & Suitability
Each technical member of staff at Chiltern railways has a toolkit issued, which is personal to them
and is used for the majority of maintenance tasks.
Aylesbury depot has 3 pitted roads for maintenance, as well as 1 road for underframe cleaning and
one wheel lathe road.
Automatic vehicle inspection system
Jarrett (2016a) explains how Chiltern railways are currently working with Gobotix, in order to
develop an automatic vehicle inspection system. The main objective of this system will be to
inspect the underframes of the vehicles, using both thermal and visual cameras. This is due to the
fact that one of the most common maintenance tasks is to inspect the underframes of vehicles to
check for damage, as well as loose and missing components. The system will compare this against
the last recorded image to detect differences and identify changes. Confidence in the necessity of
this comes from section 4.7.1, where Network Rail (2012) states the need for future proofing
design. Whilst this wasn’t in the original design as such, the ability for it to be built, clearly shows
an appreciation for operational additions.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 43%
6.7.3) Quality Control
An introduction to quality control in maintenance at Chiltern railways was summarised by Jarrett
(2016b). Generally, the company considers its tech staff to be extremely competent, so there’s no
train MOT, like there is at ATW. Technicians undergo a competency assessment every 2 years,
which checks their ability to do the work to a professional standard and is explored later on.
Nevertheless, the supervisor of each team signs off the work when it is complete, taking
responsibility and thus being accountable for all work completed by their team, as looked at in
section 4.5.
The quality control aspect for individual exams is explained by Chiltern (2016).
B class exams
A control form known as CRCL-EQF104g is used for each B exam, and controls the individual
block cards for each exam.
6.7.4) Organisation & Staff
Organisation of Chiltern railways
The organograms of Chiltern railways, as explained by Jarrett (2016a) are split into 2, one for
Engineering Department Production and one for Engineering Department Technical and
Commercial. These cover the company as a whole, as opposed to just a management overview,
which is provided by the ATW one. They go into a lot more detail than the ATW one, covering all
individual staff, as well as more clarity about each role. However, this might suggest a lack of
flexibility in staff roles.
Environmental impact
At Chiltern, the environmental impact is monitored, with statistics produced every week. An
environmental policy is in place. As Jarrett (2016a) explained, an ISO140001 registration is held by
Chiltern railways, which is granted by BSI. BSI independently audit Chiltern railways, to ensure
that they comply with the law, and have suitable plans and policy in place, in order to adhere to
their ISO140001 requirement.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 44%
Technical staff competency assessment
As mentioned in section 6.7.3, the technical staff at Chiltern railways undertake a competency
assessment every 2 years. Jarrett (2016a) explains:
This checks and assesses staff ability to work safely on a train, so it checks keys areas of
knowledge and we also observe them working. Any knowledge gaps are identified and we
will arrange further training as necessary. Staff assessed as “Not Yet Competent” are not
allowed to work without someone else checking their work on completion.
6.8) Summary of the Aylesbury Depot
A summary of the depot below shows the clear strengths and weaknesses of the depot, which can be
argued to have a direct or indirect effect on the efficiency and/or reliability of the depot due to the
confidence provided by the background research.
6.8.1) Strengths
Predictive maintenance
As looked at above, Chiltern Railways have hugely embraced predictive technology, in more than
one way.
Environmental policy
Chiltern have a comprehensive environmental policy in place, which meets all legal standards.
6.8.2) Weaknesses
No redundant space
At the moment, there is no redundant space at the Chiltern railways Aylesbury depot. This means
that very precise and accurate planning is needed, and doesn’t allow for any extensions of the depot.
As well as that, it means that the parts storage for major components is limited to an ad hoc basis,
which is inefficient and increases the downtime of a train when unplanned failures happen. Jarrett
(2016a).
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 45%
7.0) Crossrail Depot
One of the weaknesses of the ATW Canton depot was this it was adapted from a unit which
originally had a different purpose. Crossrail’s new rolling stock maintenance depot is custom built
precisely for that purpose. It would therefore be of benefit to consider how the requirements are
taken into consideration during the design and build of a new facility such as this one, when built
from scratch. The agreement for this depot covers not only building the trains and depot, but also,
32 years of train maintenance. Bombardier, in conjunction with Vinci, were awarded this contract.
As a result of this, the manufacturer has been driving the design of the new depot, building in
features aimed at achieving the best possible maintainability, reliability and presentational standard
of the cross-London fleet. Completion of the old depot, which is the site at Old Oak Common which
held concrete wall segments for feeding into the Crossrail tunnels behind the boring machines,
allows clearance of the old site, which includes demolition of the old Pullman shed. Bombardier
(2016). The Crossrail depot has 33 sidings, capable of stabling half the initial fleet, plus space to
extend for 11 car trains giving it capacity to service a train fleet up to 84 units strong.
7.1) Key features of the Crossrail depot
Due to the fact that the Crossrail depot is not yet complete, this shall not be a full compare and
contrast, as the needed data is not available. It shall be more of an overview of the key features of
the depot, in order to provide some comparison with the ATW and Chiltern depots to an ideal.
Environmentally friendly
One of the planning requirements for the Crossrail depot was that it should generate a fifth less
carbon dioxide than would be expected for a depot of this size. There are a number of green
measures, put in place by Bombardier, which go further than that, cutting 30% of the CO2
generated by the depot’s operations, with over 30% of the depot’s energy requirements will come
from renewable sources, as explained by Modern Railways magazine (2016). The building will
incorporate a number of these. These include: photo-voltaic cells, solar thermal panels and sheep’s
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 46%
wool insulation in the walls and roof. As well as that, “pipes buried deep underground will sink heat
in summer and draw up warmth in winter via heat pumps, maintaining the depot at a year-round 12
degrees Centigrade.” Modern Railways (2016). This meets Network rail’s guidance notes in section
4.7.1, regarding environmental policy.
Automatic vehicle inspection system
One of the key features of the now Crossrail depot is the Automatic vehicle inspection system. The
AVIS supports condition-based maintenance in a cost effective manner. A range of train systems
and components can be inspected, including: brake pads, wheels, pantographs and collector shoes.
As explained by Bombardier (2016a):
The system delivers accurate information to AIMS to drive maintenance planning and
deliver the following benefits:
•! Improved reliability through early detection of worn down material
•! Reduced damages to infrastructure (overhead lines, tracks)
•! Reduction of maintenance labour and vehicle downtime
•! Material savings through accurate assessment of remaining material durability
Predictive Maintenance capability
Purpose building the Old Oak Common train depot formed part of the contract which Bombardier
signed with TfL. The other part of this contract, was that Bombardier would provide 65 state of the
art Bombardier Aventra trains, to form the Crossrail fleet. These have advanced onboard
management systems, amongst which is the Bombardier Orbita predictive maintenance system.
Bombardier (2016a).
Bombardier Orbita
As explained by Dube (2007), Bombardier Orbita is an onboard management system, developed by
bombardier to make the best use of the huge amount of data which is produced by the various on
board systems. Orbita makes use of the data produced by the rolling stock in the most effective way
possible, fulfilling the data’s potential. This helps operators to “increase fleet utilisation, improve
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 47%
reliability and availability and ultimately improve the passengers' overall journey experience.”
Orbita is the next step on from continuous advancements in on board systems, with real time
performance data being made available to the operator, increasingly over the past years. The way in
which Orbita has taken this further, is by linking it in with control center based system experts.
Their role in this is to: “interrogate the data, liaise with the depots and cross-reference information
from Bombardier's extensive global fleet database to establish patterns of equipment performance.”
Dube (2007)
Potential issues can quickly be diagnosed and identified. As well as that, the team can quickly
respond to in-service faults, with the knowledge they need.
8.0) Compare and Contrast
The main objective behind this compare and contrast is to look at the various factors that contribute
to the running of ATW’s and Chiltern’s against each other, and make some assessments as to how
they affect the efficiency and effectiveness of the depot as a business. In turn, it can be looked at as
to if and how it affects the output of the depots. In the case of this report, the most reliable of those
outputs is the PPM and MTIN reliability measures. In order to carry out the compare and contrast
fully, however, the inputs must be compared. These inputs as they are, are qualitative, it would be
more accurate and effective to quantify them. This shall be carried out using the Analytic Hierarchy
Process looked at in section 4.9. Each input shall be given a percentage weighting, which is a gauge
of how important it is towards the running of the depot, judged by the author and Woods (2016b).
For each input, each company shall get a score out of ten, depending in how effective that company
is in that aspect. Those scores shall be multiplied by the weighting, to give a final score for each
input and each company. The final scores for each company shall then be added up to give a total
for each out of ten, an overall quantitative measure for how effective their inputs are.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 48%
Table 10 – Compare and Contrast Input Input
Weighting (%)
ATW summary (/10)
Chiltern summary (/10)
ATW Final Score
Chiltern Final Score
Crossrail summary
Routes and fleet size
N/A Covers most of Wales.
Covers much of London, with routes out. Slightly larger fleet and routes.
N/A N/A N/A
Type of work undertaken
10 A & B services undertaken, taking 6 and 60 man hours respectively. Major work outsourced to Pullmans. 5
A & B services undertaken and less time for similar service. Major work Outsourced. 7
0.5 0.7 N/A
Processes 25 Recent change to much more effective new process due to using up train mileages. 7
Similar to ATW’s new method, emphasis on using up mileage. 7
1.75 1.75 N/A
Facilities & suitability
30 Generally not completely suited to needs, due to old design. Continuous improvements in place. 4
Current depots at maximum usage – no redundant space. 3rd depot being built to compensate.7
1.2 2.1 New site. Being built from scratch. More than meets network rail’s design guidance.
Quality control 15 Comprehensive random checks by experienced technicians, with MOTs after every B examination. 7
Tech staff considered to be competent. Supervisor signs off B services. Easier way. 8
1.05 1.2 N/A
Organisation & Staff
10 New organisation seen as effective backed up by other sources. Seen as flexible. 7
Organisation significantly different due to depot spread. Very crowded. 5
0.7 0.5 N/A
Environmental policy
5 Comprehensive environmental policy in place, which meets legal standards.
Comprehensive environmental policy in place, which meets legal standards.
0.35 0.35 Built with environment and energy saving in mind, imbedded in the building.
%
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 49%
As can be seen, the total mark for ATW is 5.55 and the total for Chiltern Railways is 6.6. Whilst
this is arguably subjective, it does quantify the inputs in accordance with section 4.9, which
provides a guide to where improvements can be made.
9.0) Discussion
The main aim of this project, was to review the organisation structure of ATW, conducting a
compare and contrast with Chiltern railways, and citing alternative models. Many of the problems
with the organisation structure of ATW had already been identified by the time this project started,
which led to the reshuffle and new structure. This brought about a number of benefits, not least of
which was the fact that it brings about a new business vision, new business objectives, and
confidence can be had in it by the fact that it conforms to Kelly’s (1997) management process of
Function, objective, plan, organisation.
In comparison to Chiltern Railways, their organisation charts were split into two. As opposed to
having one condensed one for the senior management, theirs had every job role on, which whilst
was more comprehensive, providing more clarity about job roles, came at the cost of flexibility. The
ATW one clearly sets apart the professional engineers, in a managerial sense, which makes more
sense for keeping track of responsibilities.
Output' ATW'Summary'' Chiltern'Summary''PPM% PPM was 95.3%,
meets target of 93%.%PPM was 96.14%, meeting their target of 94.96%%
MTIN% Only%meets%target%for%3/7%of%all%fleets.%Doesn’t%for%158%and%175%fleets.%%
Meets target for 165 fleet but misses target for 168 fleet. %
Efficiency calculations & data accuracy%
Initial efficiency below 50% in general, although reliability of provided data is questionable. %
Format%of%data%means%difficulty%in%conducting%efficiency%calculations.%%
RTP 80.3%. Target of 83%. 84.66%.%Do%not%currently%have%target.%%
NPS (Train) 83% 80%%%
Table 11 – Output summary%
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 50%
Similarly, moving on to the process which ATW uses to get its trains into maintenance, the new
process uses up the train’s mileage intervals much more effectively using a much more planning
based maintenance process, which uses up each trains mileage in a much less wasteful manner. This
planning process uses predictive maintenance, with it mainly being mileage-based intervals between
services. Chiltern already had a similar process in place.
However, there are certain components that are assessed using condition-based maintenance. This is
where technological advances can really come into their own, and is where Chiltern have been
proactive, with the Atlas FO, TADS and Padview systems in use, and the automatic train
monitoring system being developed. This brings it close to par with the Old Oak Common depot,
considered close to ideal due to its high tech, custom-built design. All this can be recommended to
ATW, as an alternative model.
The type of servicing taking place at each depot is different. Whilst they both service similar sized
fleets and carry out FPX, A & B services, the A & B services do vary slightly, and take different
amounts of time, although time intervals are slightly different, this can be considered to compensate
for the slightly different train types. Additionally, the quality control aspect varies as well.
Arguably, Chiltern’s is much more reliant on its staff, as it assumes its staff are competent to
complete the service to the required standard, and backs this up with a supervisor signing off every
B service.
The inputs above cover the strength and weaknesses, and compares each of the inputs of each
company, as explained by Prosser (2016), which was made quantitative in the compare and
contrast, using Quantifying Input Data in section 4.9. The two main outputs, PPM and MTIN, were
used to compare how the companies were performing using a well know, reliable measure. Chiltern
railways had a higher PPM, which clearly shows that their newer depot and technological
advancement has had some affect.
Arguably, a better measure for measuring the output and thus effectiveness of the depots is MTIN.
This is because MTIN doesn’t have other factors that could affect it like PPM does. It is purely
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 51%
down to the quality of the maintenance on the trains. For the two fleets for each company that are
directly comparable, ATW doesn’t meet the MTIN target for either of them, and Chiltern only
meets it for one of them. This shows clear improvement needed for both the companies, although
also shows that Chiltern Railway’s more advanced inputs, as looked at in the compare and contrast,
have had an effect.
Woods (2016) had the idea of looking at how much value for money the depots were getting, that is,
how efficient they were in terms of man hours bought vs. man hours sold. Although the theory
behind this was sound, in practice, it proved difficult to conduct due to a lack of accurate data about
the time taken for A & B services. This was down to the fact that a time and motion study had never
taken place at Canton depot, and the team at ATW largely estimated the data.
Whilst this would have been OK to gain a rough estimate of the efficiency, comparing it to Chiltern
was difficult, due to the different way in which they operate. The time periods in which they operate
are significantly different, along with the fact that the A & B services take less time and are
different to the A & B services at ATW. Therefore, the main method of output comparison was left
to PPM and MTIN, which are both useful measures, particularly MTIN. However, for more
conclusive comparison a full time and motion study over both companies would be beneficial.
A final measure used was Real Time Performance. This is argued by Di Maura (2016) to be a better
measure, as it doesn’t allow for any lateness. This is one area where ATW are ahead of Chiltern
Railways, as they have set targets. Full confidence however, cannot be had in this measure, as there
is limited background research available. The comparison between ATW and Chiltern Railways
was considered fair because their fleet and depot sizes were considered similar by Jarrett (2016b).
Any differences were considered negligible for the purposes of this report.
As part of the review, a study of the new Crossrail depot at Old Oak Common was carried out, in
order to look at what an ‘ideal’ depot should look like. As a brand new, purpose built depot, this
was deemed a good example of an ideal. The Old Oak Common depot was found to be very
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 52%
advanced in terms of its predictive maintenances and embraces usage of technology, providing
ideas for improvement for both the ATW and Chiltern depots.
9.0) Conclusion
In the early stages, it was agreed with ATW to include consideration of factors that enable the
delivery of excellence in maintenance services, which shaped the original objectives of the project.
In line with this, a number of recommendations were made, both for future work and for alternative
models, or alterations of existing ones.
Recommendations
To summarise, the following recommendations can be made for ATW, with potential for future
work:
•! Embracing use of technology. Whilst good progress has been made in terms of IT usage in
planning and running of the depot, there is much more advancement in auto assessment for
condition based monitoring in Chiltern’s depot.
•! A full time and motion study. The time and motion study made at the Machynellyth depot
showed a good analysis of depot efficiency. However, this was made possible by use of an
external professional company, with a team and significant amount of time and experience
dedicated to it. As well as that, the depot was a very small one, making the task easier.
Analysis of the Canton depot suggests similar issues to be explored, in part due to the low
efficiencies and poor maintenance driver availability. Whilst it was outside the limits of this
project, a future study dedicated to it, with the correct amount of time and resources, would
clearly be very beneficial.
•! Following on from the above point, the data provided from a time and motion study would
provide the accurate, constant data needed for an in-depth assessment of efficiency. If this
was carried out group wide, it was be very beneficial. Unfortunately, the current data is not
accurate and not constant, which made it unviable within the scope of this project.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 53%
•! On a micro level, the SPM would clearly benefit from having dedicated drivers on shift
purely for the maintenance during the maintenance period. This was identified as one of the
causes of delays.
•! ATW have a number of new business objectives, as well as a new organisation structure.
These could well be significant strengths. However, time needs to be given for them to bed
in. It would be of use, in the author’s opinion, to assess whether they were met in 6 months
to a year’s time, when the new system has had time to run, to see whether they have been
implemented to their full potential.
•! As explored in section 4.6.3, component reliability, and by association, series reliability can
be used to judge unit reliability. This was outside the scope of this project, but would be a
good predictive maintenance measure, if looked at in future work.
•! Chiltern Railways are currently in the process of building a new depot. As ATW don’t have
much redundant space either, this is something that may be considered in the future. If so,
then BMT Isis, provide a good simulation tool to model maintenance depots, as looked at in
section 4.7.2.
•! Finally, the rail network to Swansea and further into the valleys is in the pipeline to be
electrified, something that would hugely affect ATW. Jukes (2016). Whilst it is still early
stages, it would be beneficial to conduct further work on this.
Whilst it is difficult to say what exactly causes MTIN changes, it is clear that it is from a
combination of all the above factors. Therefore, if they are to be met, an effort should be made to
ensure they improve over time.
A number of ideal depot characteristics were identified from the Crossrail depot at Old Oak
Common. Whilst it can be said that ATW have got a comprehensive environmental policy in place,
the Old Oak Common depot shows there is room for improvement, in terms of imbedding
environmental technology into every aspect of depot operation.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 54%
Finally, the use of Right Time Performance is a measure that both companies have clearly been
embracing, in order to go above and beyond what is required by the governing body. ATW have
been doing this more so than Chiltern however, due to them setting RTP targets. This shows a
general awareness in the need to get continuous customer satisfaction, and as a by-product, a
commitment to continuous improvement.
11.0) References
Abbott, J. 2016. Editor, Modern Railways magazine. Email to G. Lowen 2016.
Atkins, 2015. ATW Class 158 B Examination Work Measurement at Machynlleth Depot. Atkins
Bishop, P. 2016. Fleet Planning Manager. [Email]. (January 2016).
Blanks, HS, 1993. Reliability in procurement and use. John Wiley & Sons
Bombardier. 2016a. Maintenance with intelligence [online]. Available at: http://uk.bombardier.com/content/dam/Websites/gb/supporting-documents/BT/Bombardier-Transportation-Asset-Life-Management.pdf [Accessed 29th March 2016]. Bombardier. 2016b. Bombardier sign major contract with TfL. [online]. Available at:%http://www.bombardier.com/en/media/newsList/details.bombardier-transportation20140219bombardiersignsmajorcontractwit.bombardiercom.html [Accessed 4th April 2016]. Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply, [no date]. What is Procurement and Supply? [Online].Available at: https://www.cips.org/en-gb/membership/why-join-cips/what-is-procurement-and-supply/ Di Maura, N. 2016. Shift Production Manager. [Interview] (April 2016). Dube E. 2007. Bombardier ORBITA: Predictive asset management. AusRAIL PLUS 2007, 4-6 December 2007, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Houdmont, S. 2011. Assessing the efficiencies of distribution depots using data envelopment analysis. PhD Thesis, Cardiff University.
Jarrett, S. 2016a. Technical Director. Email to G. Lowen 2016.
Jarrett, S, 2016b. Technical Director. [Interview] (March 2016).
Ishikawa, K. 1990. Introduction to Quality Control. 3A Corporation
Kelly, A. 1997. Maintenance: organisation & systems. Butterworth Heinemann
Kelly, A & Harris, M.J. 1978. Management of Industrial Maintenance. Butterworth & Co Ltd.
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 55%
Jukes, D. 2016. Electrification of the Great Western Rail Network. Cardiff University. 12th April 2016. Mobley, R. 1990. An introduction to Predicitve Maintenance. Plant Engineering Series Mobley, R, 2002. An introduction to Predictive Maintenance, 2nd edition. Butterworth-Heinemann Modern Railways Magazine, 2016. Crossrail depot report. *
Prosser, M. 2016a. Fleet Organisational Review. [Presentation to ATW]. ATW, Canton depot, August 2015. Prosser, M. 2016b. Engineering Director. [Interview] (February 2016). Riddell, H. S., ‘A supervisory grid to understand the role of the foreman in the process industries’, Proc Instn Mech Engrs: Part E, The Journal of Process Engineering, Vol. 203, 1989. Transport Focus. 2016. National Transport Survery Introduction. [online]. Available at: http://www.transportfocus.org.uk/research/national-passenger-survey-introduction# [Accessed 30th March 2016] Woods, B. 2016a. Head of Engineering. Email to G. Lowen 2016.
Woods, B. 2016b. Head of Engineering. [Interview] (March 2016).
Ying, L. 2016, Quantifying Input Data. [Lecture to Engineering Year 3], Cardiff University, Cardiff, February 2016. The Economist, 2014. Chiltern railways – the engine that could. [Online] Available at: http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21593470-how-one-small-commuter-route-flourishing-engine-could [Accessed: 1st April 2016]. The Office of Rail and Road, 2016. Proportion of trains arriving on time: Train operating companies franchised by the Department for Transport (DfT). Available at:!http://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/browsereports/3. [Accessed: 4th April 2016]. %
Glyn%Frederick%Lowen% Cardiff%University% C1265675%%
% 56%
12.0) Appendix A - Record of Meetings
top related