Home » railML newsgroups » railML.infrastructure » More detailed 'speed change' definitions
Re: More detailed 'speed change' definitions [message #279 is a reply to message #278] Mon, 23 January 2012 17:02 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Carsten Weber is currently offline  Carsten Weber
Messages: 27
Registered: November 2011
Junior Member
Hi,

"Susanne Wunsch" <coord(at)commonrailmlorg> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:bb2ty3ztd6efsf(at)remiheepsaxde...
> Hi,
>
> The current thread evolves to some really fundamental discussion about
> future infrastructure (track layout) definitions in railML.
>
> Anybody who already uses railML infrastructure or plans to implement
> it, please feel personally invited for taking part in this
> discussion. Any questions, comments, opinions are highly appreciated.
>
It seems to be a dialque and not a discussion. :/

> "Carsten Weber" <weber(at)irfpde> writes:
>> "Susanne Wunsch" <coord(at)commonrailmlorg> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>> news:bb28vlg7rymfsf(at)remiheepsaxde...
>>> Hi Carsten, and all who are interested,
>>>
>>> "Carsten Weber" <weber(at)irfpde> writes:
>>>> "Susanne Wunsch" <coord(at)commonrailmlorg> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>>>> news:bb2ty4a74xnfsf(at)remiheepsaxde...
>>>> > "Carsten Weber" <weber(at)irfpde> writes:
>>>
>>> If your track may be operated in both directions - yes. I try to put a
>>> small example here, hope it helps.
>>>
>>> <speedChange pos="10" dir="up" vMax="40"/>
>>> <speedChange pos="10" dir="down" vMax="60"/>
>>> <speedChange pos="200" dir="both" vMax="80"/>
>>>
>>> pos 10 200
>>> track dir ------------------------------------------------------------ >
>>> vMax -> 40-> 80->
>>> vMax <- <-? <-60 <-80
>>>
>>> The <speedChange> information defines the maximum speed aspect for the
>>> next track section, means up to the next <speedChange> element in the
>>> track definition direction. A <speedChange> for both directions means,
>>> that the speed aspect at the next track section is the same for both
>>> train running directions. It is _not meant_ to be the same speed aspect
>>> from this point in both directions - that is really misleading!
>>>
>> So it becomes tricky to use this structure.
>
> Yes. That may be current practice.
>
> Nevertheless I asked some current railML IS user for their current
> practice and opinion about the above issue. Most of them appreciated a
> clearer structure without the possibility to define speed aspects for
> both directions changing at a certain "point". That's really too much
> confusing.
>
> If nobody disagrees with good reasons I would file a Track ticket for
> "deprecating" the "both" enumeration value from the "dir" attribute in
> all "*Change" elements.
>
> New or already used practice is to define seperate elements for each
> running direction. The above example would be:
>
> <speedChange pos="10" dir="up" vMax="40"/>
> <speedChange pos="200" dir="up" vMax="80"/>
> <speedChange pos="2xx" dir="down" vMax="80"/>
> <speedChange pos="200" dir="down" vMax="60"/>
>
> That means that the semantic for the same XML content changes. That is a
> very hard cut that can't be recognized by any parser!
>
It is a question of your position. Do I have to combine two speed
restrictions which are shown at the same position to differnt dircetions
into one element? I do not think so. So I can keep both of them in two
elements and do not do any mistake in RailML-useage. So for me the cut looks
not so heavy.

[...]

>>> If you have a speed restriction along a bridge, you may define different
>>> <speedChange> elements in each direction refering to the same speed
>>> profile with different speed aspects. The <speedChange> elements already
>>> need the direction attribute. Why do we need to duplicate it?
>>>
>>
>> Because of more clearance.
>> In my sight a speedChange should be a child of a speedProfile.
>> <speedProfile direction="up" ...>
>> <speedChange position="0" speed="60" .../>
>> <speedChange position="5" speed="120" .../>
>> <speedChange position="123" speed="100" .../>
>> <.../>
>> </speedProfile>
>>
>> So you can see: the speedChanges if you run the track in one direction in
>> a
>> line.
>> But this structure requires a break in downward compatibility which is
>> not
>> leagl at the moment.
>
> The compatibility break is only one side effect of the above mentioned
> example. Another aspect is that speed profiles are much more general
> definitions than the detailed speed changes along the tracks.
>
> You may define some speed profiles for different axle weights that are
> referenced at multiple tracks. If you would define these speed profiles
> at each track you get heavy redundancies and may "lose track of the big
> picture".
>
> What's the difference between these two approaches from the timetable
> point of view?
>
> Let's define a train (part sequence) that goes along three tracks
> deploying two speed profiles.
>
> (pos) 0 150 345 468 768 1035
> track t1-> t2-> t3->
> vMax sp1 80-> 80-> 80->
> vMax sp2 40-> 40-> 40-> end
>
> That means the train (part sequence) deploying both speed profiles is
> restricted to the following speed profile:
>
> (pos) 0 150 345 468 768 1035
> vMax 80->40-> 40-> 40-> 80->
>
> Now let's have a look at your approach (how I understood):
>
> <track id="t1">
> <trackTopology>...(pos=0..345)
> <trackElements>
> <speedProfile id="sp1" description="Default" dir="up"
> influence="increasing">
> <speedChange id="sc1" pos="0" vMax="80"/>
> </speedProfile>
> <speedProfile id="sp2" description="temporary restriction" dir="up"
> influence="reducing">
> <speedChange id="sc2" pos="150" vMax="40"/>
> </speedProfile>
> </trackElements>
> </track>
> <track id="t2">
> <trackTopology>...(pos=0..123)
> <trackElements>
> <speedProfile id="sp3" description="Default" dir="up"
> influence="increasing">
> <speedChange id="sc3" pos="0" vMax="80"/>
> </speedProfile>
> <speedProfile id="sp4" description="temporary restriction" dir="up"
> influence="reducing">
> <speedChange id="sc4" pos="0" vMax="40"/>
> </speedProfile>
> </trackElements>
> </track>
> <track id="t3">
> <trackTopology>...(pos="0..567)
> <trackElements>
> <speedProfile id="sp5" description="Default" dir="up"
> influence="increasing">
> <speedChange id="sc5" pos="0" vMax="80"/>
> </speedProfile>
> <speedProfile id="sp6" description="temporary restriction" dir="up"
> influence="reducing">
> <speedChange id="sc6" pos="0" vMax="40"/>
> <speedChange id="sc7" pos="300" vMax="end"/>
> </speedProfile>
> </trackElements>
> </track>
>
> Reference from within the timetable:
>
> <trainPartSequence>
> <trainPartRef ref="tp1"/>
> <trainPartRef ref="tp2"/>
> <trainPartRef ref="tp3"/>
> <speedProfileRef ref="sp1"/>
> <speedProfileRef ref="sp2"/>
> <speedProfileRef ref="sp3"/>
> <speedProfileRef ref="sp4"/>
> <speedProfileRef ref="sp5"/>
> <speedProfileRef ref="sp6"/>
> </trainPartSequence>
>
> <trainPart id="tp1">
> ...
> <sectionTT>
> <trackRef ref="t1" dir="up"/>
> ...
> <trainPart id="tp2">
> ...
> <sectionTT>
> <trackRef ref="t2" dir="up"/>
> ...
> <trainPart id="tp3">
> ...
> <sectionTT>
> <trackRef ref="t3" dir="up"/>
>
> Now let's have a look at my approach:
>
> <speedProfile id="sp1" description="Default" influence="increasing"/>
> <speedProfile id="sp2" description="temporary restriction"
> influence="reducing"/>
> ...
> <track id="t1">
> <trackTopology>...(pos=0..345)
> <trackElements>
> <speedChange id="sc1" pos="0" dir="up" profileRef="sp1" vMax="80"/>
> <speedChange id="sc2" pos="150" dir="up" profileRef="sp2" vMax="40"/>
> </trackElements>
> </track>
> <track id="t2">
> <trackTopology>...(pos=0..123)
> <trackElements>
> <speedChange id="sc3" pos="0" dir="up" profileRef="sp1" vMax="80"/>
> <speedChange id="sc4" pos="0" dir="up" profileRef="sp2" vMax="40"/>
> </trackElements>
> </track>
> <track id="t3">
> <trackTopology>...(pos="0..567)
> <trackElements>
> <speedChange id="sc5" pos="0" dir="up" profileRef="sp1" vMax="80"/>
> <speedChange id="sc6" pos="0" dir="up" profileRef="sp2" vMax="40"/>
> <speedChange id="sc7" pos="300" dir="up" profileRef="sp2"
> vMax="end"/>
> </trackElements>
> </track>
>
> Suppose the following reference from within the timetable.
>
> <trainPartSequence>
> <trainPartRef ref="tp1"/>
> <trainPartRef ref="tp2"/>
> <trainPartRef ref="tp3"/>
> <speedProfileRef ref="sp1"/>
> <speedProfileRef ref="sp2"/>
> </trainPartSequence>
>
> The <trainPart>... definitions are the same as in your approach.
>
Ok. Now I understand. Your approach looks quite heavy. So the exclusion of
common information is quite good if you have a lot of information the
exclude but I think this does not appear in this situation.

[...]

>>> 0° .. 3.4° 80 km/h
>>> 3.5° .. 5.4° 90 km/h
>>> 5.5° .. 8° 100 km/h
>>>
>> Yes. So you would have to define 3 different speed profiles. A speed
>> profile
>> without any data to tiliting or a tilting angle of "0", a second one with
>> tilting angles higher than 3.5° and a third one for tilting angles higher
>> than 5.5°.
>
> If that definition satifies all needs of railML users - let's do it this
> way. Prior to fixing this issue to your clarification I would like to
> ask for some Swiss, Austrian... experiences with tilting speed profiles.
>
Ok. Let me know the answer(s).

>>>> >> <xs:element name="tiltingSpeed" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1">
>>>> >> <xs:annotation>
>>>> >> <xs:documentation>Tilting parameters for which this speed
>>>> >> profile
>>>> >> is
>>>> >> calculated.</xs:documentation>
>>>> >> </xs:annotation>
>>>> >> </xs:element>
>>>> >
>>>> > The terminus "speed" may be a bit misleading. I suppose, that is not
>>>> > related to the "train speed" but to the "rate/speed of tilting", that
>>>> > means the value of tilting degrees per second. I would call this
>>>> > attribute "rate". Are there any other ideas?
>>>> >
>>>> > This attribute may be bound to the railML type
>>>> > "tSpeedDegreesPerSecond".
>>>> >
>>>> > There is another kind of information related to the tilting that comes
>>>> > to my mind: the method of tilting. It could go into an attribute
>>>> > "method" that is bound to an enumeration of "active", "passive",
>>>> > "rollCompensation", "unknown", "other:anything".
>>>> >
>>>> I know this. But is it really important here? Do I need to know which
>>>> way
>>>> the vehicle tilts?
>>>
>>> I thought that it is another type of speed restriction. If you go with
>>> "roll compensation" you may increase your speed, if you support "active
>>> tilting", you have to switch the system off and go with default speed
>>> aspect. This may be a Swiss use case, I mean.
>>>
>> Yes and no. So you need a speed profile for tilting angles up to 2° (or
>> something like that) and you may have a second one for higher tilting
>> angles. So if your vehicle is only able to do a tilting up to 2° you can
>> only run the "slow" profile. The way you reach the tilting angle is not
>> really important. It is more a question of the tilting speed but it is
>> also
>> not important there.
>
> Are there any different speed profiles for the same tilting angle
> depending on the tilting method?
>
I do not think so. But maybe anybody else has an opposite example.

>>>> By the way: We need to define an "endOfSpeedList". So for example if
>>>> you
>>>> have to run slow with a train e.g. above a bridge the allowed speed
>>>> goes
>>>> back to track speed after you left the bridge. So you need an option to
>>>> say:
>>>> the speed profile ends here. Other speed profiles are now in progress.
>>>> So
>>>> you can use speed profiles along the whole train run but they have one
>>>> one
>>>> speed limitation at a short bridge or something like this.
>>>
>>> No, that use case is covered by allowing multiple speed profiles that
>>> overlap each other. The software export has to ensure that there are
>>> valid speed definitions for all sections of the track.
>>>
>> This maybe a missunderstanding.
>> For example the bridge with there speed limit. So you define a
>> speedProfile
>> for a high axleLoad or something like this and say at the beginning of
>> the
>> bridge: maxSpeed="60". So what do you write at the end of the bridge
>> where
>> the speed raises up to a minimum of all the other speedProfiles?
>
> +1
>
> I really missed this issue. We need some "end of speed restriction"
> indication. That may be defined as additional fixed string allowed for
> the "vMax" attribute, e.g.
>
> <speedChange id="sc7" pos="300" dir="up" profileRef="sp2" vMax="end"/>
>
Yes, sSomething like this.
So it can be mixed up with another speed information.

When will the preview be available?

Best regards.
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re-factoring of <infraAttributes>
Next Topic: Hierarchy of overlaying speed profiles and National vs. Generic speed profiles.
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Apr 25 12:03:46 CEST 2024