Home » railML newsgroups » railml.infrastructure » [railML3] speed at level crossing (how to model the allowed speed at a LX in unprotected mode)
[railML3] speed at level crossing [message #2547] Fri, 09 October 2020 13:24 Go to next message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 289
Registered: January 2016
Senior Member
Dear all,

in the railML use case working group "ETCS" we recently discussed how to model the allowed speed for a level crossing that is in unprotected mode.

The idea is to reference a <speedSection> element from the <levelCrossing> with the attribute @linkedSpeedSection (see [1]).

The interesting question for you:
Is the speed at level crossings in unprotected mode direction dependent? If yes, we have to conclude that it should be possible to refer to more than one <speedSection> from the <levelCrossing>.

Any comment is highly appreciated...

[1] https://trac.railml.org/ticket/377

Best regards
Christian


Christian Rahmig - Infrastructure scheme coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
Re: [railML3] speed at level crossing [message #2550 is a reply to message #2547] Fri, 09 October 2020 15:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dirk Bräuer is currently offline  Dirk Bräuer
Messages: 295
Registered: August 2008
Senior Member
Dear Christian,

without being aware the full options in the r3 model, with a view from r2, I would say:

> Is the speed at level crossings in unprotected mode
> direction dependent?

Yes, it surely can be, practically. The modelling depends on whether a <speedSection> applies unconditionally or whether there can be more <speedSection>s at the same place where the lowest applies.

In general, there may be other reasons for direction-dependant speed limits at the very same place of the level crossing. So the resulting permitted speed may be different even in case the unprotected LC itself does not need a direction-dependence. So if there are several speed profiles allowed and the linked <speedSection> is not necessarily the ultimate, it could be enough to link only one.

However, even then I cannot imagine that the LC itself is surely direction-independent when unprotected in all cases and all countries. Local rules should apply then. Can railML foresee all local rules? The motorist must have a chance to see the train for a certain time before the train enters the LC. The visibility of the track from the street can easily be direction-dependent. I think it's on the safe side to allow more than one <speedSection>.

Best regards,
Dirk.
Re: [railML3] speed at level crossing [message #2594 is a reply to message #2547] Thu, 19 November 2020 17:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Luca Agazzani is currently offline  Luca Agazzani
Messages: 1
Registered: November 2020
Junior Member
Dear Christian,
I just join railML community and i would like to bring my experience, based mainly on italian signalling.
For what concern LX, in my experience, regardless the direction, at least two different <speedSection> would be needed in case of level crossing unprotected: one if there is an error on the barriers of the level crossing and the other if there is an error on the road signals.

Best regards,
Luca
Re: [railML3] speed at level crossing [message #2610 is a reply to message #2594] Tue, 08 December 2020 10:47 Go to previous message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 289
Registered: January 2016
Senior Member
Dear Luca and Dirk,

thank you for your replies. I conclude that we need the possibility to reference more than one <speedSection> from a <levelCrossingIS> being in unprotected mode. Therefore, a (repeatable) child element is required. I adapted the Trac ticket #377 [1] accordingly.

[1] https://trac.railml.org/ticket/377

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: railML 2.3 infrastructure extension proposal - "change"
Next Topic: [railML2/3] <trainDetector> for manually operated stations
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Jan 18 15:28:25 CET 2021