Home » railML newsgroups » railml.interlocking » [railml3.1] Redundant references in TVD sections and restricted areas
[railml3.1] Redundant references in TVD sections and restricted areas [message #2080] Tue, 08 January 2019 22:21 Go to next message
Thomas Nygreen is currently offline  Thomas Nygreen
Messages: 57
Registered: February 2017
Member
Dear all,

It seems to me that the references to all tracks (partially) inside a TVD section (<relatedToTrack>s) and the references to all track assets in a restricted area (<trackAssetInRA>s) are both redundant and incurring a large overhead. In both cases, these references can be found by the consuming system by following other defined references.


Best regards,
Thomas Nygreen
Railway capacity engineer
Jernbanedirektoratet
Re: [railml3.1] Redundant references in TVD sections and restricted areas [message #2103 is a reply to message #2080] Wed, 16 January 2019 12:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Joerg von Lingen is currently offline  Joerg von Lingen
Messages: 109
Registered: May 2011
Senior Member
Dear all,

we discussed the issue of <relatedToTrack>s in TVD section today.
1) The element shall be optional not mandatory.
2) It was introduced to allow finding the neighbour TVD section in case of sections with gap as described by Norwegians.
Means there may be cases where (especially) track circuits without explicit insulated rail joints (IRJ) are not joining
or overlapping. As long as we cannot exclude such cases of gaps I would rather keep the possible references to
underlaying track.

Regards,
Jörg von Lingen - Interlocking coordinator

Thomas Nygreen wrote on 08.01.2019 22:21:
> Dear all,
>
> It seems to me that the references to all tracks (partially)
> inside a TVD section (<relatedToTrack>s) and the references
> to all track assets in a restricted area (<trackAssetInRA>s)
> are both redundant and incurring a large overhead. In both
> cases, these references can be found by the consuming system
> by following other defined references.
>
  • Attachment: TC_gap.jpg
    (Size: 6.55KB, Downloaded 21 times)
Re: [railml3.1] Redundant references in TVD sections and restricted areas [message #2104 is a reply to message #2103] Thu, 17 January 2019 05:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Joerg von Lingen is currently offline  Joerg von Lingen
Messages: 109
Registered: May 2011
Senior Member
see also post https://www.railml.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=614& start=0&

Jörg von Lingen - Interlocking coordinator
Re: [railml3.1] Redundant references in TVD sections and restricted areas [message #2112 is a reply to message #2104] Mon, 21 January 2019 15:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Thomas Nygreen is currently offline  Thomas Nygreen
Messages: 57
Registered: February 2017
Member
It is correct that finding the next TVD section by looking for other sections referencing the same boarder is not robust when there can be gaps. But that does not make it necessary to include a reference to the track. Actually, in the case of a gap, the next TVD section will not necessarily belong to the same track (e.g. if the gap occurs in a switch). I would rather suggest using the spotLocation/@netElementRef of the already referenced trainDetectionElement and follow that netElement in the applicable direction (if necessary across relations).

Best regards,
Thomas Nygreen
Railway capacity engineer
Jernbanedirektoratet
Re: [railml3.1] Redundant references in TVD sections and restricted areas [message #2116 is a reply to message #2112] Sat, 26 January 2019 05:00 Go to previous message
Joerg von Lingen is currently offline  Joerg von Lingen
Messages: 109
Registered: May 2011
Senior Member
<relatedToTrack>s in TVD section removed

Thomas Nygreen wrote on 21.01.2019 15:10:
> It is correct that finding the next TVD section by looking
> for other sections referencing the same boarder is not
> robust when there can be gaps. But that does not make it
> necessary to include a reference to the track. Actually, in
> the case of a gap, the next TVD section will not necessarily
> belong to the same track (e.g. if the gap occurs in a
> switch). I would rather suggest using the
> spotLocation/@netElementRef of the already referenced
> trainDetectionElement and follow that netElement in the
> applicable direction (if necessary across relations).
>
Previous Topic: What is the rationale for multiple <assetsForIL>s?
Next Topic: switchType IS vs. IL
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Mar 24 05:37:01 CET 2019