Home » railML newsgroups » railml.infrastructure » [railML2] modeling of a car ramp (car ramp)
[railML2] modeling of a car ramp [message #2200] Mon, 03 June 2019 11:47 Go to next message
Torben Brand is currently offline  Torben Brand
Messages: 125
Registered: March 2016
Senior Member
Problem description
The Norwegian railML community needs to model a car ramp (Example image https://images.app.goo.gl/avBsC8MYFjGLvDML7) on the end of a track for loading/unloading cars.
The purpose/use case is Network statement and schematic track plan.

Mapping
As I see it we can use either choose to use:

• Use <platformEdge>
• use <serviceSection>
• model a (nor) extension for freight equipment on a microscopic level

The wiki states that the <platformEdge> (https://wiki.railml.org/index.php?title=IS:platformEdge) is used for "A <platformEdge> A <platformEdge> defines the border line between platform and railway track, where passengers are meant to board and un-board the train."

We could use <serviceSection>
https://wiki.railml.org/index.php?title=IS:serviceSection
https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=122 instead
(it is also listed in the railML2.4nor documentation https://www.jernbanedirektoratet.no/railml graphics on page 10 to be used as is in Norway).
However, the wiki states that "A <serviceSection> defines the border line between a railway service area and a railway track, where the service for the train takes place. A service section is always connected with exactly one railway track."
So strictly speaking it is meant for, as I understand it, the service of the train/ the trains maintenance. So, freight loading/unloading facilities are not part of it.

There are no freight loading facilities in the railML2.4 on a microscopic level (under trackElements). There are macroscopic elements under ocp<propService> (https://wiki.railml.org/index.php?title=IS:propService).

Solution suggestion

A. an extension
An extension should be done properly. So here a complete modelling should be made for all necessary elements and attributes. Probably a new element <freightEquipment> under <trackElements>?. This would demand a proper use case be defined. Which is not in place for now and is not anticipated.

B. Use <platformEdge>
The definition clearly states " where passengers are meant to board and un-board the train"
Thus, I understand not to use <platformEdge> for loading facilities like a car ramp.

C. Use <serviceSection>
As an easy solution for now. We could choose to see the term "service" broader.
There is an attribute @ramp (and @loadingFacility for other freight loading). The definition is unfortunately not really helpful:
@ramp:" defining the service section as being a ramp"
@loadingFacility:"defining the service section as being equipped with loading facilities".

I find the suggested definitions in the initial forum posting far more helpful and precise:
"ramp" (ramp for loading / unloading goods)
"maintenance" (maintenance facilities e. g. in a depot)
"loadingFacility" (Goods can be (un-)loaded from the wagon's
top / underfloor

I suggest going for @ramp for the car ramp.

Also more important the forum posting for serviceSection ( https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=122& amp ;goto=283&#msg_283) anticipated loading of freight. The attribute descriptions are clearly meant for loading/unloading of freight. However, this has been "lost in translation" into the wiki.
I suggest improving the wiki page for <serviceSection> with a clear definition to mean service and freight handling of trains. Also, a more elaborate definition of the attributes would be helpful (like the initial suggested definitions).

Another problem is, as a car ramp is not alongside the track. There is another challenge for using <serviceSection> as it is defined to be alongside the track (like platformEdge). This both in the wiki definition, the presence of a @length attribute and in the @side attribute being restricted to the values "left" and "right".
This could be solved with a semantical rule for objects being at the end of the track instead of alongside it. This either with the rule:

1. No use of the attribute @side and a @length attribute of "0". This would restrict the attribute defining the length of the ramp outside the track area (in front of the track). This might be ok as @lagth in railML is always seen as along the tracks prespective.
2. No use of the attribute @side and a serviceSection@pos value corresponding to the @pos value of <trackEnd> or <trackBegin> with the sub element <bufferStop> placed.
3. In railML 2.5 extend serviceSection@side with the value "end"

I suggest C2 as the solution for now and C3 for later. What does the railML community think?

[Updated on: Mon, 03 June 2019 11:49]

Report message to a moderator

Re: [railML2] modeling of a car ramp [message #2236 is a reply to message #2200] Mon, 26 August 2019 16:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 328
Registered: January 2016
Senior Member
Dear Torben,
dear all,

please apologize my very late reply on your car ramp modelling issue...

Now, being back from holidays, I want to work on this topic, so that we
can come up with a solution for future railML versions 2.5 and 3.2.

Some thoughts from side of the infrastructure coordinator:
* don't use <platformEdge> as it is intended for passenger traffic
* <serviceSection> might be the right place, but list of attributes etc.
needs to be adapted as already identified by you
* <ocp><propService> seems suitable to be used for macroscopic model
* car ramp as new element sounds quite specific and can probably be
modelled with a (generic) ramp

However, I am open to any ideas and throughts coming from the railML
community. So, dear experts, please don't hesitate to share your
opinion/experiences with us...

In order not to forget about the car ramp, I created a Trac ticket to
collect all information and proposals on the solution of the issue [1].

[1] https://trac.railml.org/ticket/362

Best regards
Christian

--
Christian Rahmig - Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Phone Coordinator: +49 173 2714509; railML.org: +49 351 47582911
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railml.org


Christian Rahmig - Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
Re: [railML2] modeling of a car ramp [message #2539 is a reply to message #2236] Fri, 18 September 2020 16:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 328
Registered: January 2016
Senior Member
Dear railML community,

what are your thoughts and ideas on the car ramp issue?
What would you need for a first implementation in railML 2.5?

Any comment is highly appreciated...

Best regards
Christian


Christian Rahmig - Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
Re: [railML2] modeling of a car ramp [message #2540 is a reply to message #2539] Sat, 19 September 2020 18:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dirk Bräuer is currently offline  Dirk Bräuer
Messages: 295
Registered: August 2008
Senior Member
Dear Torben and Christian,

Laderampen (as we call them in German) are a common feature of railways, so I would prefer a railML-internal solution and not an extension.

I would not welcome the usage of <platformEdge> since I can rarely imagine a loading ramp which can equally used for passengers as well as freight (concerning height, access, service properties as labelling, roof, benches, lamps... not to write about cleanliness). Rather, a software should be able to distinguish between passenger platforms and freight loading ramps/platforms. So, I think we should limit <platformEdge> to passenger usage.

I don't see any objections against the usage of <serviceSection>. I would agree with Torbens solution C2 (no @side; @pos
corresponding to the @pos value of <trackEnd> or <trackBegin>). I would use this even after r2.5 (no <serviceSection>@side="end").

Please be aware that there are combined "Kopf- und Seitenrampen" (side and end loading ramps) which should possibly be split into two railML <serviceSection>s, one with @side and @length>0 and one with no @side... Also, there should be a possibility to distinguish between the simple loading ramps (Kopf- und/oder Seitenladerampe, flat level concrete) and the special ones for cars (with metal car drives) like that on Torben's photo - may be by a @type or @kind attribute.

Best regards,
Dirk.
Re: [railML2] modeling of a car ramp [message #2739 is a reply to message #2540] Fri, 28 May 2021 14:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 328
Registered: January 2016
Senior Member
Dear Torben and Dirk,

I updated the Trac ticket #362 [1] with a railML 2.5 solution proposal based on your feedback here in the forum. Please feel free to review and confirm the way of modelling.

For distinguish between different construction types of the car ramp, I suggested to introduce a new attribute <serviceSection>@rampType with possible enumeration values "flat" and "metalBridge". What are your comments on this proposal?

[1] https://trac.railml.org/ticket/362

Thank you very much and best regards
Christian


Christian Rahmig - Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
Re: [railML2] modeling of a car ramp [message #2752 is a reply to message #2739] Mon, 07 June 2021 13:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dominik Looser is currently offline  Dominik Looser
Messages: 9
Registered: March 2020
Junior Member
Hi,

I agree with the proposed solution to use <serviceSection>s to model car ramps here. The new @rampType attribute should be optional.

Best regards,
Dominik
Re: [railML2] modeling of a car ramp [message #2757 is a reply to message #2752] Fri, 11 June 2021 14:44 Go to previous message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 328
Registered: January 2016
Senior Member
Dear all,

thank you for your feedback. I updated the proposed railML 2.5 solution in Trac ticket #362 [1] accordingly. The new attribute @rampType will be implemented in the schema together with upcoming railML 2.5.

For a better understanding of modelling car ramps, it would be great having at least one best practice example for a car ramp included in the railML 2 wiki. Can anyone from the community contribute with a best practice example of a car ramp from their railway network once railML 2.5 has been finally released?

[1] https://trac.railml.org/ticket/362

Thank you very much and best regards
Christian


Christian Rahmig - Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
Previous Topic: @keepsOrientation in Track object
Next Topic: [railML 2.5] state
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Jun 19 03:01:15 CEST 2021