Page 298 - 360.revista de Alta Velocidad - Nº 5

Grande, Zacarías. Torralbo, Julia. Lobera, José Manuel. Sánchez-Cambronero, Santos. Castillo, Enrique.

• Minimal environmental impact, since most of the line would be carried out in an unproductive
area because there was previously a railway line and, therefore, it consists of a duplication
instead of a line construction.
• Performance optimization, since this segment affects both routes at the same time.
• Reduction of construction costs because most of them are track duplication and not new
construction.
• Reduction of maintenance costs, because these segments beards both high speed and
conventional services.
Finally, the multi-criteria evaluation, shown in Table 10, indicates that the best economic
criteria are obtained by those alternatives that imply cheaper construction costs, while the
best quality indices come from those alternatives with a higher percentage of double track.
However, the optimal multi-criteria final value, which computes the whole indicator bound to
equation (3) and its own weights (see Table 9), corresponds to alternative 5, as shown in Table
10.

Table 9 Indicators weights of Case Vitoria-Zaragoza

Indicator Weightened
BCR 40%
PB 10%
QM 40%
IE 10%

Table 10 Multicriteria Assessment for Vitoria-Zaragoza Case

Economic Quality indices
Case Criteria Multicriteria
Value
BCR PB QM TR max TR medio I
E
0 0.000 1 0.25 - - - 1.975
1 2.829 9 0.69 1.29 1.09 - 7.534

2 2.825 9 0.68 1.28 1.09 - 7.473
3 2.819 9 0.83 1.22 1.05 0.20 8.299
4 2.753 9 0.96 1.16 1.02 0.61 9.118

5 2.716 10 0.97 1.11 1.01 0.84 9.328

6 2.333 13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 8.974

2.2.5 Description of the adopted solution

Finally, the alternative with highest score is Alternative 5, which is the adopted solution. The
solution has the following characteristics:
• The configuration results in 37.4% of double track against 62.6% of single track.

296 360.revista de alta velocidad