California HighSpeedRail Series

High Speed Rail in Japan: A Review and Evaluation of Magnetic Levitation Trains

MamomTaniguchi

Working Paper UCTCNo. I02

The University of California Transportation Center Umversity California of Berkeley, CA 94720

The University Transportation

of California Center

The University of California Transportation Center (UCTC) is one of ten regional units mandated by Congress and established in Fall 1988 to support research, education, and training in surface transportation. The UCCenter serves federal Region IX and is supported by matching grants from the U.$. Departmerit of Transportation, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and the University. Based on the Berkeley Campus, UCTCdraws upon existing capabilities and resources of the Institutes of Transportation Studies at Berkeley, Davis, Irvine, and Los Angeles; the Institute of Urban and Regional Development at Berkeley; and several academic departments at the Berkeley, Davis, Irvhae, and Los Angeles campuses. Faculty and students on other University of California campuses may participate in

Center activities. Researchers at other universities within the region also have opportunities to collaborate with UCfaculty on selected studies. UCTC’seducational and research programs are focused on strategic planning for improving metropolitan accessibility, with emphasis on the special conditions in Region IX. Particular attention is directed to strategies for using transportation as an instrument of economic development, while also accommodating to the region’s persistent expansion and while maintaining and erahancing the quality of life there. The Center distributes reports on its research in working papers, monographs, and in reprints of published articles. It also publishes Access, a magazine presenting sum° maries of selected studies. For a list of publications in print, write to the address below.

University of Calltorma Transpo~fion Center 108 NavalArchitecture Building Berkeley,California 94720 Tel: 510/643-7378 FAX:510/643-5456

Thecontentsof this report reflect the viewsof the authorwho responsible is for the facts andaccuracy the data presentedherein. Thecontentsdo not of necessarily reflect the official views policiesof the State of Californiaor the or U.S. Department Transportation. of This report doesnot constitute a standard, specification,or regulation.

High Speed Rail in Japan: A Review and Evaluation of Magnetic Levitation

Trains

Mamoru Taniguchi
Institute of Urbanand RegionalDevelopment Universityof California at Berkeley Berkeley, CA94720

CALIFORNIA HIGH SPEED RAIL SERIES

Working Paper April 1992

UCTCNo. 102 TheUniversity of California Transportation Center University of California at Berkeley

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wouldlike to express mythanks to director Peter Hall, who provided me with a chance to write this paper. I am also thankful to the High Speed Rail Research members,who gave me helpful advice, including DanLeavitt, Brian Sands, and Walt Streeter. Mythanks are also due to the staff of the Institute ,of Urbanand Regional Developmentat the University of California at Berkeley, who mademe a most wek;omevisitor, including Martha Conwayand David Van Arnam, who helped produce this paper. I also extend my appreciation to those who provided me with useful information, especially Professor Kozo Amanoand Lecturer Dai Nakagawa the University of Kyoto. at

PREFACE

This is one of a series of reports nowbeing producedas the first output of our study of the potential for a high-speedpassenger train service in California. Eachreport deals with a specific 1-dghspeed train technology; it attempts an evaluation, standardized as far as available data permit, of its tedmical and economicviability. Specifically, each report assesses the particular high-speed technology against numberof a criteria:

1. Technical Performance:configuration of roadbed in terms of gradients, curvature, and construction cost; powersources; capacity and speed; capacity to integrate with existing transportation facilities. 2. Economic performance:traffic levels; revenues; financial appraisal and overall costbenefit analysis; level of public subsidy required, if any. 3. Resource consumption and environmental performance: type and amount of energy required; impact on non-renewableresources; environmental impact, including emissions, noise, visual intrusion and effect on local communities.

The present series includes five studies. Twocompanion studies, on British Rail’s InterCity 125 and 225 services and on Tilting Trains (the Italian Pendolino and the SwedishX-2000service), will follow shortly. Thereafter, a systematic comparativeanalysis will be published. The CaiSpeed study will continue with preliminary route alignments, also to be produced shortly, followed by market assessments, to be completedin Fall 1992. These will bring to a close the present phase of work, which will be the subject of an overall report also to be completedin Fall 1992o Wegratefully acknowledgethe support provided by the U.S. Department of Transportation and the California State Departmentof Transportation (Caltrans) through the University of California TrarLsportation Center. Of course, any errors of fact or interpretation should be assigned to us and not our ,sponsors.

PETER HALL Prhlcipal Investigator

REVIEW AND EVALUATE EXISTING

SYSTEMS: MAGLEV (JAPAN)

INTRODUCTION This report aims to show the detail of the Japanese Maglev system, and allow a comparison wRhother High Speed Rail systems for use in California. Ol:~ration passenger service. The following major subject areas are examined in this report: 1. Development History 2. Engineering: 3. Engineering: 4. Environment 6. Economic Issues 7. NewTest Track and Future Use 8. Summary The following abbreviations are used in this report: MAGLEV JNR RTRI Magnetic levitation vehicle Train and Track Mechanism The Japanese Maglev system is a comthat aims at 313 mph pletely new technology, using superconducting magnetic levitation,

the Japanese National Railways the Railway Technical Research Institute This report is part of the work of the California High Speed Rail Group at the Institute of

Urban and Regional Development>University. of California at Berkeley.

1. DEVELOPMENT HISTORY After the first Shinkansen line was constructed in 1964 between Tokyo and Osaka in Japan, of a faster train in future. The development of a Maglev train Table 1 shows

JNRbegan to research the possibility

using linear motor propulsion and non-contact running was a focus from the start. In December 1979, the Magiev achieved 323 mph on this short test track. I989. Thid new 26.9-mile test track has the possibility tral) Table 2). The development of the Japanese Maglev system is continuing.

the history of Japanese Maglev development. In 1977, the 4.4-mile Miyazaki test track was opened. To improve and test the system for real use, construction of a long test track ha Yamanashiprefecture was decided upon in of being incorporated into die Chuo (cenLinear Express that will be a future service line between Tokyo and Osaka (see Figure 1 and

Engineering information

in this report is based on the data from the newest MLU002 type train at the Miyazaki test track. It should be noted that the Maglev train will be much improved after the opening of the new test track in Yamanasiprefecture in 1994.

2.

ENGINEERING: TRACK AND VEHICLE Since the MLU002 the third-generation test vehicle running on the Miyazaki test track, it is

was designed to fit the existing test track. The main features and general appearance of the MLU002 vehicle are shown in Table 3 and Table 4 and Figure 4 show the planned

Figure 2. As this vehicle was designed as a test vehicle, seating capacity is limited to only 44. The vehicle for commercial service will have about 70 seats. design for commercial service. Under this new arrangement, magnets will be provided at both

ends of the vehicle. This type of vehicle has the following two merits: 1. A smaller sectional area caused by lowering the floor height makes for less air resistance. 2. The magnetic flux density in the compartment wiU be reduced because of the long distance between the passenger compartment and the superconducting magnets. Magnetic shielding x will be required only on the gangway above the magnet and machine room.

3.

ENGINEERING: System

MECHANISM

*Propulsion

The vehicle is propelled by mutual attraction superconducting magnets constitute

and repulsion of magnets. The on-board in

a linear synchronous motor. As the ground coils installed

z Table 1. History of Japanese MaglevDevelopment

Early 1960s 1970 1972

Research linear motor for propulsion non-contact started. and run Basictest facilities for superconductive Maglev completed. LSM-propulsion experiment vehicle (LSM200) succeeds levitated run. in UM-propulsion experimental vehicle (ML-100) succeeds levitated run. in High-speed characteristicof cycloconverter (S00km/h equipment) tested. LSM-pmpulsion experimental vehicle (ML-100A) succeeds perfect non-contact in run. MiyazakiMaglev Test Centeropened. Running of ML-500 inverted-T test on 8uideway starts at Mi~7*kiTestTrack. 347km/h attained (with magnetic run levitaUon). Simulated tunnel run tested. Run with helium refrigerator onboardtested. 517km/h attained(with magnetic run levitation). Running of MLU001 U-typeguideway test on starts at Miyazaki Test Track. Manned run starts. test 4001~n/h of a singlevehicleattained. run 352km/h of three vehiclescoupled run attained. 400.81cm/h of two vehiclescoupled run (manned) attained. RaiIway Technical Research Institute reorganized a research as foundation, taking over the R&D so far pursued. wore Test run of MLUO02 starts. 3S2km/h attained. run Yamanashi Prefecture selected construction new was for of test track.

1975 1977 April July 1978 Nov. 1979 Jan. May Dec. 1980 Nov. 1982 Sept. 1983 Aug. Dec. 1987 Feb. April May Sept, 1989 Aug.

Figure 1. Maglev Test Tracksin Japan

Table2. Comparison between MiyazakiExisting Test Track ~ and Yamanashi Test Track New
ExistingTestTrack Overall length testtrack of Maximum speedattained 7kin(singletrack) ML-500 (unmanned 517km/ instantaneous) MLU-O01 (manned 400o8km/h) MLU-002 (manned 307kin/h) MLUO02 vehicle length 22m New Test Track 43kin(partially doubletracks) Target: manned 500mk/h about3 minutes

Test vehicle

2 makeups: units, 5 units 3 vehide makeup Iength (3 units) about 70m (5 units) about120m

Test track

Maximum gradient 5/1000 Radiusof minimum curve r = 10,000m

Maximum gradient 40/1000 Radius of minimum curve R = 8,000m

Table 3. MainFeaturesof MLUO024
Vehicledimension Lengthx Widthx Height Seating capacity Mass Superconducting coil Number coils of Nagnetomotive force Pole pitch Suspension Uft Effectivegap Guidance Guidance force Effectivegap Propulsion ThruLst Phase Frequency Voltage Current Maximumspeed 22.0mx 3.0mx 3.7m 44 17t 3 polesx 2 bogies 2 rows x 700 kA 2,100mn 196kN 110mm 83.3kNat 50ramshift More than 150ram 0-79.4kN 3 0-28Hz 5, 800V 900A 420krn/h

Figure 2. Prototype MaglevVehicle, MLU0025

1
I

tl$oo |2=oe

6 Table 4. DesignSpecifications of a MaglevSystem for Commercial Service
Maximum speed Vehicledimension Lengthx Widthx Height Seating capacity Mass Train Number vehicles of Length Mass Seating capacity Superconducting coil Length width;pole pitch x Nagnetomotive force Number coils per bogie of Ground for suspension coil Length width; pitch x Ground for propulsion coil and guidance Length width; pitch x Voltage Levitationheight Midway between tracks Curve radius Gradient

SOOkm/h
28.0m 2.8m 2.65m x x (endcar) 21.6m 2.8m 2.65m x x (mid car) 67(end car); 68(midcar) 27t (end car); 18t (midcar) 14 315m 270t 950 2.2mx 0.5m;2.7m 700 kA 4 (2 polesx 2 rows) 0.6m 0.3m;0.gin x

1.5m 0.61m;1.8m x 18kV a.c. 100mm 5.4m over 6,000m S00km/h at 100% (*maximum); 60% (continuous)

7 Figure3. Maglev Vehiclefor Commercial Service

l

@~liJl~lll
,
0 0000000000

,
~

,
0000000000

b~,--~~ ..L. 1- I T i -~
~ 0 l

%%,
"" ~t~

~..,t_.. ~ _
1~

the guideway receive the alternating current, a shifting magnetic field is generated along ground coi~. Figure 4 shows this principle of propulsion9

*Vertical

Suspension by mutual repulsion of magnets. As the vehicle with on-board superlaid on the ground, the magnetic fields currents in the ground coils (Figures 5 and 6). These

The vehicle is levitated

conducting magnets runs faster over the coils for levitation of the on-board magnets induce electric currents generate a levitation the coil on the ground?

force for the vehicle. The vehicle floats at more than 100ram above

*Lateral

Guidance and repulsion of magnets to keep the vehicle at the center to one side, the ground coils for propulsion

Maglevuses the mutual attraction

of the guideway. When the vehicle is deflected laterally

on both sides generate a guidance force. This force is an electrodynamic force generated between the ground coils for propulsion and the on-board magnets. The guidance force at the small gap x° side becomes a repulsion force, and the one at the large gap side becomes an attraction force, *Braking System

The brake in normal service is a regenerative brake based on the linear synchronous motor. Emergencybraking is provided by an electric brake, sliding shoes, and an aerodynamic brake. Sliding shoes are made of metal; skidding and wind pressure panels support an aeroxx dynamic brake,

*Superconducting

Magnet a superconducting magnet. Specific metals such as niobium and the electric resistance at cryogenic temperaDevelopment of new superconthe superconducting magnets. Table 5 and Figure

The vehicle carries tures.

titanium perform superconductivity, which nullifies Coils made from such metals constitute 7 show the details

of the main feature of a superconducting coil.

ducting materials that perform superconductivity at higher temperatures will help to make a 12,15 and more compact magnet for Maglev, and will be available soon. lighter

4 Figure4. Principle of P|’opulsioW

On-board

superconduc~inq coil

Shif ~in9 field

" " -~- --I .~’~ L___N___~r-L.J-%-~tr--~-’-S ...... J ~- -’~,( N -4 L. .... ..... ~ ....

3-phase

power source

Ground col! for propulsion

is Figure 5. Mechanism Ve~ical Suspensionand Lateral Guidance of

1

Figure 16 Coll Arrangement 6.

1: Superconducting coil, 3.: groul~d coi~ for propulsion and guidance. ~: ground coiJ [or suspension -

17 Table 5. Main Features of Superconducting Coil

Coil

Dimension (length × height) Mass Cross-section (thickness x width) Magnetomotiveforce Number turns of Self-inductance Current density Stored energy Maximum field Copperratio Cross-section (thickness × width) Number filaments of Diameterof filaments Twist pitch

1.7m x 0°5m 77kg 45ram x 71ram 700kA 1167 1 3.04H 2 219A/mm 550kJ 5.1T 1.06 1.05mm x 2.12mm 2,382 23 m 4gram

Wire

F~gure 7. Superconducting

Magnet for

the MLUO0218

Liquid

RefrigerGtor hel~

Truck

from~~

~~

~Support

Outer vessel

Su)erconductingcoil

4.

ENVIRONMENT Consumption which increases with speed.

*FAectridty

The energy consumption is proportional to the air resistarme, eight times larger. However, the amount of electricity

For example, if the vehicle speed increases from 156 mph to 313 mph, energy consumption will be consumption by the Maglev is estimated to be about 90W/h per passenger for operation between Tokyo and Os21ra at 313 mph. An aircraft 19 consumestwice the electricity that the Magiev does.

*Noise and Vibration Maglev has no noise and vibration problems caused by roiLing friction wheels. In addition, it is free from friction between the rail and

noise between the trolley and pantograph. However,

Maglev may generate some aerodynamic noise. Presently, studies are being made in wind tunnels ° fred an optimum vehicle shape, and to smooth the ground coil surfacd to *Effect of Magnetism on the Hurn~ Body There is a big debate about the effect of the magnetic field on the humanbody, and the degree of its safety. a very weak reaction JNR and RTRIhave done many experiments since 1983 using rats and mice. on a mammalbody. The superconductive magnet used for the Maglev will They found that a magnetic feld less than one tesla (10,000 gauss) occurring for several days exerts create a strong magnetic field (about 200 gauss) on the passenger floor surface. Accordingly, they concluded that it will have no serious effect on the humanbody.2x However, several other papers point out that problems may adse, and suggest that more regard will need to be taken to the care 22 magnetic fields. of Whether the magnetic field will pose a serious problem or not, RTRIis continuing its effort to reduce magnetic flux density on the passenger floor. Examples of effective devices are as follows..23 1. Vehicle design: The train coil will be separated from the passenger compacm-,ent (see Figure 3). 2. Track design: Although in previous designs the track coil extended from a concrete wall in the guideway, new designs have the coil implanted in the wall, thereby decreasing magnet-wave range. 3. Shielding: Shielding will cut off the remaining magnetic fields.

10

z4 Figure 8. Strength of Magnetic Field

SECTION MA GNET ~~ 0000 ARRA Y,

~..--

CABIN FLOOR

~~~L
-

¯ ....... , ° t.~. ,..

C MAGNET

FLUX DENSITY [GAUSS ]

.i---~.....

VEHICLE

,"/~11.-~4~~:~_~20@.O. CABIN --/: ~~~f==,~ F L 0 0 R

~oo kkS__ _jooo-~\ ,Io1:1
U¯ .. .... GUIDEWAY COILS STA TOR WINDINGS MAGNET WINDING SECTION C-C

5.

ECONOMIC ISSUES Thoughit is difficult to estimate the construction and operation cost ofMaglev, a cost-

revenue balance analysis has already been attempted. Construction and operational costs are 2~ presently estimated by the Transport Research Center as foUows

*Construction

Cost

The construction cost of Maglev is assumed to be $35.2 million per mile. Chuo Linear Express will be approximately 250 miles long. Accordingly, total construction cost will be $8.8 billion. However, other estimates by the Transport Economic Rese~ch Center predict a cost of $10 to $20 billion.

*Operational

Cost

The operational cost consists of both fixed cost and variable cost. Variable cost increases with the service level of Maglev. As Maglevs will not require rail maintenance, fixed cost will not be as expensive as that for the Shinkansen. Fixed Cost: $326.4 thousand/mile Changeable Cost at 313 mph Operation: Changeable Cost at 188 mph Operation: $0.08/person/mA $0.054/person/mi

*Case Study of Chuo Linear

Express

The test adopted two cases for passenger numbers between Tokyo and Osaka: 15,000 persons/day and 20,000 persons/day. Table 6 shows total operational cost in each case. The test is conducted under two types of financial assumptions (I and H). Assumption I allows no subsidy for construction and $0.592 passenger fare per mile. Assumption II allows 30 percent subsidy for construction and $0.48 passenger fare per mile. Table 7 and Table 8 show the results of the calculation. Fromthese case studies, the key factor in achieving early balance is not speed, but demand. 20,000 person/day demandis enough to achieve a profit within six years under conditions of $0.592 passenger fare per mile and 313 mph maximumspeed.

12

Table 26 EstimatedOperationCost in EachCase 6.
Cost: SMillion: $1 = ¥135 Passengers Max.speed (persons/day) (kin/h) 15,000 500 300 20,,000 50O 3OO F~ed Cost 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 Variable Cost 11.1 7.4 14.8 9.6 Total Operational Cost 19.3 15.6 23,0 17.8

Table7". EstimatedTime(Years) to AchieveFinancial BalanceAfter Beginning Operation 27 (Assumption !)
Passengers 15,000

(persons/c~y) (kin/h)
50O 300 20,000

Max. speed

a) Achieve Balance b) Clear UpAccumulated Defidt a) 19 years b) 31 a) 18 b) 25

500 3OO

a) b) 11 a) b)

Table 8. EstimatedTime(Years) to AchieveBalanceAfter Beginning Operation z8 (Assumption Ii)
Passengers Max.speed (pemons/day) (km/h) 15,000 500 300 a) Achieve Balance b) ClearUpAccumulatedDeficit a) 21 years b) 42 a) 29 b) 33

2~ooo

500 300

a)
b) 19

a) b) 12

6.

NEW TEST TRACK AND FUTURE USE of New Teat Track

*Details

The requirements for the new test track are as follows: I. There shall be continuous straight sections. 2. There shall be curves. 3. There shall be steep slope sections. 4. There shall be structures such as tumaels and viaducts. 5. The test track shall have a total length of some 25-32 miles. The Magnetically Levitated Train Study Committee selected Yamanashi Prefecture in August 1989, as shownin Figure I. This site is the most suitable place to achieve the test objectives and to demonstrate future use° Figure 9 shows a plan of the new test track design and 29~° 10 shows the future extension plan as Chuo (Central) Linear Express Figure *Regional Impact

The Maglev system will become one of the most convenient and comfortable transportation systems in Japan’s future. Maglev will bring not only transportation great impact on urban and regional forms. Currently, Japan is suffering improvements, but also a many urban problems

caused by the concentration of urban functions in Tokyo, such as high land price, congestion, local decline, and so on. A high speed rail system such as Maglev should be planned together with these urban problems. Amano, Toda, and Nakagawasuggest using Maglev as a tool for the decentralization of urban function. 31 Their idea is to construct 200300 hectare new cities stations. on vacant land in Kofu, Nagoya, and Osak~ cities, which will have Maglev which compose As shown in Figure 11, these areas are designated as Special Districts, an effective regional plan to relieve

the quadruplet "Capital Special City" with Tokyo’s Kasumigaseki-Marunouchidistrict.

14

-~2 9. Detail of New Figure TestTrack

i

SMg|e track S;ngM track section . Double track .sectioc~ ,. section , ~ectionfor higt~ s~’~ed pa’ngt" t

L

Substation |

i/

.

I

I ~’1Sub~Uonl

\

(Ve~icalcro~~cliion concet~tJ

ss Figure FuturePlanof Chuo 10. (Central)LinearExpress

Note 1: As the ChuoLinear Express willbe constructed through mountainous a inland area, is important reduce construction to overcome i¢ to the cost severe natural features whenan appropriate route willbe examined. station Each should be constructedsuitable inorder activate along line. ata place to cities th/s

Note 2: Planned section: Tokyo-Osaka Length of rail" Approximately500kra Planned maximum speed:5001an/h Steepest grade: 40-70% Construction period: Approximately ~ years

~4 Figure 11. Concept the Quadrup|et of Capitals Project with UnearExpress Ts~ubaAcademic Research Park~

~ ~

-~ Narita International Airport

Tokyo 23 boroghs
%"

\
Chiyoda Special District (Kasumizaseki-Marunouchi district)

@

KSfu City
K5fuSpecial Distric

k
Linear Express Chubu Academic Research Park
~ ~a

Tokaido Shinkausen
District . Nagoya
.° ¯

Access rail road. or

Osaka Special District ChUbuInternational Airport

OsakaCity

l(ansai International Airport

7. RF.CENT DEVELOPMENTS The MLU002, most advanced version of the Japanese Maglev train, caught on fire at a the low speed on October 3, 1991. The cause of the fire was not ~high-tech n parts, but a very simple qow-mch" friction design; therefore, problem between the emergency landing cushion and the guideway. Accidents the overall concept of Japanese Maglev will not change. The biggest problem of this nature can be prevented by the simple replacement of a few materials and a small change of was only that the Japan Railway Research Institute lost one test car in the Miyazaki test line. However, the full development schedule of the Maglev will be postponed at least one year.

8.

SUMMARY Japanese Maglev development reached a new stage in 1988 with the real possibility of a

Chuo Linear Express between Tokyo and Osaka. The test car has achieved a speed record of 323 mph., and most mechanical systems have already been optimized. s,iU continues, resulting in future cost reductions. Thirty million people live in the TokyoMetropolitan Area and 15 million people in the Osa~a Metropolitan area. This situation assists the construction of the ChuoLinear Express high land Since the through high demand, but compromises it on the other hand through the increasingly prices. In addition, Japm~’s severe topography requires expensive infrastructure. Calflbrnia would be lower there. To establish the correct solution for the California corridor is not easy. Most high speed z~il l:echnologies are continuing to evolve and are difficult to evaluate. Besides, they are designed to fit conditions in their original countries. It will be necessary to improve the selected system to fit c~nditions in the California corridor in order to establish an effective transportation system for that environment. However, system improvement

corridor has enough space without high mountains, the construction cost of Maglev

17

NOTES tHisashi Tanaka, "Maglev Approaches toward Practical Use,"fapanese Railway Engineering, No. 102, 1987. 21~diwayTechnical Institute of Japan, Linear Motor Car Maglev, 1988. 3Masahito M~oguchi and Fumino Olmmura, "Perspective of Linear Motor Car in 21st Century - Research and Development of Magnetically Levitated Train,’fapanese Railway Engineering, No. 113, 1990.

~Tanaka, 3.
51bid., 3. 6E0id.,3.

7Ibid.,3.
~Iiroshi Takeda, "Japanese Superconducting Mu#ev: Present State and Furore Perspective," Pbystca B, No.

164, 1990. ~Asid, 8. x°Ibid., 8. Xlibid., 8. X2IbM.,1. X~Ibtd.,8. 14Ibid., 8. 15Ibid., 1. t6][bid., 8. X~Ibid.,8. x~bid., 8. Xglbid.,2.

2°Ibid.,2. 2tlbM.,2. x2Chri$ J. Boon, DCMagnetic Fields, ACElectrical Fields and Interaction Effects: Implications for HighSpeed Passenger Systems, a paper presented to the 70th Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board, 1991. 23Ibid., 3o 24Ibid., 22. 25Transport Economic Research Cenmr: Research Report, Practical Use Possibility 1990 (in Japanese). 26Ibid., 25.

of Maglev Type Train,

27Ibid., 25. ~bid., 25. 29Ibid., 2. 3°Kozo Amano, Tsunekazu Toda, and Dai Nakagawa, The Rapid Transportation System and ~ SocioEconomic Restructuring offapan, a paper presented to the 1989 Congress of Regional Science in Europe. 5Xlbid., 30. 3~bido, 2. 331bid., 30. 3qbid., 30.

18