| Suggestion towards new attributes and sub element for <doors> [message #1835] |
Mon, 11 June 2018 15:09  |
Torben Brand
Messages: 162
Registered: March 2016
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jernbanedirektoratet needs for a better capacity planning to map the following attributes and sub element of the vehicle doors. Thus we suggest the following new attributes under <doors>:
@openingTime - Time from stand-still of the vehicle to the flow of passengers can start through the doors. This is estimated to be at a door gap of 80cm.
@closingTime - Time after closing signal is given on the last door to the vehicles can be put in motion.
@minimumStopTimeDoors - minimum time between vehicle stops and starts the motion with doors opening and closing.
Thus we suggest the following new sub element under <doors> with attributes:
<passengerFlowSpeed>
@FlowSpeed - average/planned number of passengers per second that can flow through the doors and vestibules of the vehicle at given platform heights
@platformHeight - platform height in millimetres for a given flow speed.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Suggestion towards new attributes and sub element for <doors> [message #1837 is a reply to message #1835] |
Tue, 12 June 2018 18:40  |
Dirk Bräuer
Messages: 313
Registered: August 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Torben,
I welcome the improvement of railML concerning better capacity planning, especially the @openingTime, @closingTime and @flowSpeed information.
Please consider that modern vehicles have moveable door sills which can be moved out (electro-mechanically). The door sills cannot always be used - it depends on the platform edge and also winter conditions. From my opinion, the @openingTime should depend on whether the door sills are moved out or not.
I don't understand the @minimumStopTimeDoors value.
a) Shall this be a minimum total stop time, so from scheduled arrival until scheduled departure, including a minimum passenger flow?
or
b) Shall this simply be the sum of @openingTime + @closingTime, so excluding any passenger flow?
In case of (a), I would not regard it as generally accepted for railML. The minimum passenger flow, in general, depends on the station (frequency of passenger usage of a station). In case of very rarely used stations, there can even be scheduled stops with a "too low" passenger flow time (time for alighting and boarding). This time delta can be as low as zero, in case of a series of stops on request which are not likely used altogether.
In case of (b), I would decline it because of redundancy.
So, currently I have some concerns about @minimumStopTimeDoors.
Dirk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Suggestion towards new attributes and sub element for <doors> [message #1885 is a reply to message #1864] |
Fri, 03 August 2018 05:28 |
Joerg von Lingen
Messages: 149
Registered: May 2011
|
Senior Member |
|
|
see changeset [809] (https://trac.railml.org/changeset/809/railML) and ticket #335 (https://trac.railml.org/ticket/335)
Dr.-Ing. Jörg von Lingen - Rollingstock scheme coordinator
Torben Brand wrote on 03.07.2018 12:45:
> Dear Dirk and RS community,
>
> I retract my suggestion for @minimumStopTimeDoors. We might
> model it as a nor: extention if it is needed after all. I
> ask for all other suggestions to be implemented in
> railML2.4RS. I think we should not use the element term also
> in the attribute term, as this is redundant. For example use
> @openingTime and not @doorOpeningTime under element
> <doors>.
> I thank Dirk for the extensive description for the
> composition of the regular stop time. We model similar, but
> not quite the same. This as in Norway the departure
> procedure starts 20 seconds before the published departure.
> So that in Norway published departure is equal to actual
> departure in a situation with no delay. We will come back to
> this issue at a later stage.
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
