| Modeling LevelTransitions [message #3698] |
Fri, 15 August 2025 18:31  |
Silvan Gruber
Messages: 13
Registered: July 2024
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Dear railML-experts,
From the SBB perspective, the following information is relevant for modeling level transitions:
Location of the levelTransition and its applicationDirection
- Can be mapped with etcsLevelTransition.spotlocation... => OK
switch to ETCS Level
- Can be mapped with etcsLevelTransition.switchToLevel... => OK
Length of the acknowledgment area for the level transition
- Can be mapped with "etcsLevelTransition.switchToLevel@lengthOfAcknowledgement". If no acknowledgment window is to be configured, the attribute is not listed.
- Question: Is it necessary to specify different lenghts of acknowledgment areas depending on "switchToLevel"? Otherwise, "lengthOfAcknowledgement" could be specified as an attribute of "etcsLevelTransition."
Level Change Announcement Distance
- The announcement distance is the distance before the level transition, from which the RBC transmits P41 (levelTransitionOrder) with "D_LEVELTR=x" metres (as soon as a vehicle sends a TPR within this distance to the level transition and the route is set over the level transition). This distance cannot be mapped with railML3.3. In Switzerland, the announcement distance is chosen so that the levelTransitionOrder only takes effect 50 meters behind the levelTransition. This measure prevents a vehicle from changing levels before the leveltransition due to odometry inaccuracies. Therefore, an offset value must also be available for the announcement distance.
- Question: What do you think about introducing an attribute such as "lengthOfAnnouncementByRBC" [metres] for the "etcsLevelTransition" element?
TransmittedBy
Packet 41 is sent at the following locations:
- RBC sends P41 when a vehicle sends a TPR within the level transition announcement distance and the route across the levelTransition is set
- Balise with L0 announcement
- Border balise at levelTransition (with D_LEVELTR="now")
Notice: It is unclear how the "isTransmittedBy" attribute should be understood in this context, since P41 is sent by different elements depending on the situation. Thus, if a balise group sends P41, it is mapped using baliseGroup.functionalType@value="announcementLevelTransition ". The information in "isTransmittedBy" would be redundant in this situation.
Best regards
Silvan
[Updated on: Fri, 15 August 2025 18:34] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Modeling LevelTransitions [message #4184 is a reply to message #4116] |
Mon, 14 September 2026 12:49  |
christian.rahmig
Messages: 592
Registered: January 2016
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Lukas and Silvan,
I took your solution proposal document and transferred it into a Gitlab issue for the enhancement of the etcsLevelTransition element [1].
Can you please have a look at the ticket and let me know if I forgot some details?
[1] https://development.railml.org/railml/version3/-/work_items/ 797
Thank you very much and best regards
Christian
Christian Rahmig – Infrastructure schema coordinator
railML.org (Registry of Associations: VR 5750)
Altplauen 19h; 01187 Dresden; Germany www.railML.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Modeling LevelTransitions [message #4207 is a reply to message #4206] |
Thu, 24 September 2026 16:31 |
Lukas Affolter
Messages: 7
Registered: May 2026
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Dear railML-experts,
Based on the discussions on the 24th of August 2026 inside the working group we updated the draft for the enhancement of etcsLevelTransition:
https://cloud.railml.org/f/802000
Kind regards,
Silvan Gruber & Lukas Affolter
SBB AG
Infrastruktur - Netzdesign, Anlagen und Technologien - Bahnsteuerung
Hilfikerstrasse 3, 3000 Bern 65
+41 79 904 77 32
lukasaffolter(at)sbbch / www.sbb.ch
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Login
Home
