# Analysis, Evaluation and Simulation of Railway
## 3 Results and Discussion
### Synchronized Timetables and DR  
Many railway administrations in Europe (Germany, France, Switzerland, etc.) use the so-called synchronized timetables (reports dealing with medium-term scenarios foresee a higher level of synchronization in several countries, e.g., Germany with 30 min interval for IC devices by 2030-2040 [6]). These timetables make easier the use of transport because the customer easily remembers the start of its trains (i.e., trains leave for their destination 5, 7, 13, 25 or 33 min past every hour). A well-known example is the Swiss Railways (SBB, Table 21). SBB-CFF-FFS operates 9000 passenger trains per day on its network, and has a well-known prestige to ensure safe and timely railway operation (i.e., high punctuality ratios). Specifically, SBB-CFF is proud because there are trains every half hour that connect the major population areas (e.g., at 7 h 49 or 8 h 49, and 8 h 25 or 9 h 25, from Zurich to Luzern, Table 21). The trend is firm because railway development plans in the future (PRODES 2035) foresee train departures every 15 min from Zurich to major populations in the Zurich area. Unfortunately, this policy also has several drawbacks: Its load curve peaks daily a value around 500 MW that can change up to 300 MW during short term intervals (1-5 min, short-term changes in demand has been discussed in the previous paragraph). This power is needed to accelerate trains (the reader can revisit \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Case/Scenario** & **Load Factor (\%)** & **EStB (\%)** & **MKPI5 (\%)** & **Peak Clipping and Peak (\%, MW)** \\ \hline
1-Individual & 5.37 & NA \({}^{1}\) & NA \({}^{1}\) & NA \({}^{1}\), 7.73 \\ \hline
2-Aggregated (considering delays) & 7.47 & NA \({}^{1}\) & NA \({}^{1}\) & NA \({}^{1}\), 5.56 \\ \hline
3-Regenerative & 5.09 & 4.83 & 30.03 & 0, 7.73 \\ individual & 6.91 & 10.53 & 30.03 & 0, 5.56 \\ \hline
4 + 5 Hybrid S-730 as & 4.98 & 4.83 & 30.03 & 0, 7.73 \\ DER (individual) & 13.85 & 15.9 & 30.03 & 59.9, 3.1 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{1}\) NA, baseline case.  
\end{table} 
Table 20: Substation at Chinchilla (CH). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Case/Scenario** & **Load Factor (\%)** & **EStB (\%)** & **MKPI5 (\%)** & **Peak Clipping and Peak (\%, MW)** \\ \hline
1-Individual & 2.65 & NA & NA & - \\ \hline
2-Aggregated (considering delays) & 3.85 & NA & NA & - \\ \hline
3-Regenerative & 2.59 & 1.83 & 32.71 & 0, 10.2 \\ individual & 2.59 & 1.83 & 32.71 & 0, 10.2 \\ \hline
4-Regenerative & 3.48 & 19.71 & 32.71 & 0, 7.06 \\ Aggregated & 3.48 & 1.83 & 32.71 & 0, 10.2 \\ DER (individual) & 3.48 & 1.83 & 32.71 & 0, 10.2 \\ \hline
6-Off-board 20 kWh & 9.05 & 12.3 & 32.71 & 69.6, 3.1 \\ storage (individual) & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 19: Substation at Rio Záncara (RZ). Section 3.1). Nevertheless, changes in Swiss Power System in the Zurich area, due to residential and commercial loads do not reach 35 MW in 15 min interval. To overcome this problem SBB is enrolled in a Demand Response research project in its loads, specifically to reduce train hotel load and heating of points (heating of trains from seconds to some minutes). The objective is to reduce peak load by 70 MW in 2023. The concern of this section is to demonstrate the potential available from the use of HVAC loads of trains as DR resource (demand flexibility, DSF). Moreover, the use of on board storage in hybrid trains jointly with DR could help to support changes in demand and opens the possibility for the management of railway load curves during periods of high rates of increase of demand. The use of pantographs in passenger or in power coaches is a well-known and proven concept in European Railways (including Germany, Switzerland, Netherlands or Spain, Figure 24).