Home » railML newsgroups » railML.infrastructure » Identical signal representation [de:Gruppenausfahrsignal]
Identical signal representation [de:Gruppenausfahrsignal] [message #327] Wed, 04 July 2012 18:54 Go to next message
pierre.simon is currently offline  pierre.simon
Messages: 8
Registered: July 2012
Junior Member
Hello, I'm Pierre Simon and I work for Infrabel which is responsible of
the railway infrastructure in Belgium. We are developping a software for
helping in the installation of the ETCS1 on the belgian railway. That's
why we are now joining the railML community.

The first subject is : The representation of the identical signal

Usually, identical signals are installed at the exit of a grill
(de:GleisHarfe). They are visible for the driver if the train is in the
grill or even if it is on the main track.
We suggest to duplicate this signal for all the tracks where the driver
will see the signal and add an attribute ('identicalSignal') to refer
signals between each other. (Apparently this kind of signal is at least
used in Belgium, Germany and Czech Republic).

[de: Fuer Gruppenausfahrsignale wird ein Attribut benoetigt,das die
einzelnen Signale miteinander verlinkt.]

--
----== posted via PHP Headliner ==----
Re: Identical signal representation [de:Gruppenausfahrsignal] [message #335 is a reply to message #327] Wed, 04 July 2012 20:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Christian Rahmig is currently offline  Christian Rahmig
Messages: 151
Registered: January 2011
Senior Member
Hello Pierre,

> Hello, I'm Pierre Simon and I work for Infrabel which is responsible of
> the railway infrastructure in Belgium. We are developping a software for
> helping in the installation of the ETCS1 on the belgian railway. That's
> why we are now joining the railML community.

welcome to the railML infrastructure forum. It would be interesting to
hear more about your application of the railML schema at the next railML
meeting in Zurich, Switzerland, on November 14.

> The first subject is : The representation of the identical signal
>
> Usually, identical signals are installed at the exit of a grill
> (de:GleisHarfe). They are visible for the driver if the train is in the
> grill or even if it is on the main track.
> We suggest to duplicate this signal for all the tracks where the driver
> will see the signal and add an attribute ('identicalSignal') to refer
> signals between each other. (Apparently this kind of signal is at least
> used in Belgium, Germany and Czech Republic).

If we have a look at the real (installed) infrastructure, only one
signal (common signal) exists whereas the "signal duplicates" can be
classified as virtual signals: They repeat the common signal's
information, but cannot be found in the real infrastructure. So, one
option would be to allow for such virtual signals and define an
attribute "virtual" of type boolean. As you proposed, another attribute
"identicalSignal" or "signalRef" may be used to refer to an existing signal.

But since there are quite a few objections regarding virtual
infrastructure objects I would like to ask the other users: What do you
think about virtual signals?

Regards

---
Christian Rahmig
railML.infrastructure coordinator
Re: Identical signal representation [de:Gruppenausfahrsignal] [message #340 is a reply to message #335] Thu, 05 July 2012 13:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dirk Bräuer is currently offline  Dirk Bräuer
Messages: 311
Registered: August 2008
Senior Member
Hello Pierre and Christian,

>> Usually, identical signals are installed at the exit of a grill
>> (de:GleisHarfe). They are visible for the driver if the train is in the
>> grill or even if it is on the main track.
>> We suggest to duplicate this signal for all the tracks where the driver
>> will see the signal and add an attribute ('identicalSignal') to refer
>> signals between each other. (Apparently this kind of signal is at least
>> used in Belgium, Germany and Czech Republic).

> But since there are quite a few objections regarding virtual
> infrastructure objects I would like to ask the other users: What do you
> think about virtual signals?

I agree with Pierre that an additional information is necessary in the
tracks for which a "group starter" [Gruppenausfahrsignal] is valid. At
another infrastructure model we also had such "group starter stopping
place" [Gruppenausfahrhalteplatz] elements.

At lest they tell a train entering the track where to stop (they are not
allowed to proceed until the main signal fouling the points).
Additionally, they tell a train which is ready to depart from the train
that the "group starter" is valid and, again, that it is not allowed to
proceed until the "group starter" is cleared for that train.

---
So, we do need a virtual element there but I would not call it
'identicalSignal'. I would also not call it "group starter stopping place"
[Gruppenausfahrhalteplatz] in RailML which sounds a little bit too
special. But from my opinion, it is more a kind of stopping place than an
additional signal.

In some cases and some countries, there a marker boards at these places
(H-Tafeln in Germany, Fahrtstellungsmelder 559 in Switzerland, marker
boards in UK). In these cases, one could say that we wouldn't need the
virtual "group starter stopping place" because it follows from the real
existing marker board which should be an element elsewhere in the RailML
file. In my opinion, it should be left to the writing program to add the
virtual element at the same place (meter) of the real marker - just to
describe the function.

If we have a possibility to describe a stopping place ("H-Tafel") in
RailML - which we should have - we could use that and add a property
"virtual". This fits to the discussion on <stopPosts> earlier that year.

So, my suggestion is:
- to define a <stopPost> as optional virtual,
- to allow an optional cross-reference from a <stopPost> to a main signal.

Best regards,
Dirk.
Re: Identical signal representation [de:Gruppenausfahrsignal] [message #401 is a reply to message #340] Wed, 24 October 2012 16:23 Go to previous message
Christian Rahmig is currently offline  Christian Rahmig
Messages: 151
Registered: January 2011
Senior Member
Dear Dirk, Pierre and other railML users,

> So, my suggestion is:
> - to define a <stopPost> as optional virtual,
> - to allow an optional cross-reference from a <stopPost> to a main
> signal.

indeed, this suggestion seems to be the best solution for the task of
modelling "group starter stopping places". Thank you, Dirk. Therefore, I
added a comment to the trac ticket [1] about the stop posts, which will
be implemented with railML 2.2.

[1] https://trac.assembla.com/railML/ticket/167

Regards

--
Christian Rahmig
railML.infrastructure coordinator
Previous Topic: Fwd: Mapping of code and abbreviation for ocps
Next Topic: basic idea of the signal/panel enhancement
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Mar 29 11:22:34 CET 2024