G. Lowen - ATW Project

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.


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


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.


% 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.


% 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 %


% 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)


% 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


% 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.


% 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.''

'


% 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


% 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)


% 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)


% 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.


% 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.


% 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


% 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.


% 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)


% 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


% 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


% 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.


% 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


% 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.


% 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


% 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)


% 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.


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)


% 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'


% 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'


% 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).


% 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


% 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


% 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


% 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


% 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


% 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%


% 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.


% 34%

5.8) Summary of the Canton Depot

5.8.1) Strengths


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


% 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.


% 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)'


% 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)'


% 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)

%


% 39%


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.

%


% 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%

%


% 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%


% 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.


% 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.


% 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.


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).


% 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


% 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


% 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.


% 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


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.

%


% 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%


% 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


% 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


% 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.


% 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.


% 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.


% 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]. %


% 56%

12.0) Appendix A - Record of Meetings

G. Lowen - ATW Project

Documents

Transcript of G. Lowen - ATW Project