Home » railML newsgroups » railml.interlocking » [railML3]: special infrastructure in IL - bascule bridge, tunnel gates
[railML3]: special infrastructure in IL - bascule bridge, tunnel gates [message #2609] Sun, 06 December 2020 06:20 Go to next message
Jörg von Lingen is currently offline  Jörg von Lingen
Messages: 55
Registered: March 2016
Member
Dear all,

within railway networks there are special components of infrastructure with
impact to train operation - bascule bridges, tunnel gates or water barriers.
Mainly they have some characteristics in common:

1) They are in infrequent use compared to train operation.
2) They have one position supervised by the interlocking for safe train passage.
3) If they are not in that position their operation is outside the interlocking,
e.g. by a local panel.

Thus the modelling in railML would be similar to a keylock. However, there may
be other data about them needed. The technical time for opening and closing
process might be of interest for calculating the minimum duration of
non-availability for train passage. Additional the typical duration of
non-availability is needed for planning process.

In addition there are networks with more harsh conditions where it is desired to
keep gates at tunnel portals closed most of the time and open them only for
train passage. In that case they are fully controlled by interlocking and the
modelling would be more like level crossing.

The question to you is:
a) What are the data you need with such infrastructure?
b) Are there other modes of operation?

--
Best regards,
Joerg v. Lingen - Interlocking Coordinator
Re: [railML3]: special infrastructure in IL - bascule bridge, tunnel gates [message #2635 is a reply to message #2609] Sat, 16 January 2021 09:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jörg von Lingen is currently offline  Jörg von Lingen
Messages: 55
Registered: March 2016
Member
ticket for bascule bridge:
https://trac.railml.org/ticket/449

ticket for tunnel gate:
https://trac.railml.org/ticket/450


Best regards,
Joerg v. Lingen - Interlocking Coordinator
Re: [railML3]: special infrastructure in IL - bascule bridge, tunnel gates [message #2639 is a reply to message #2635] Mon, 18 January 2021 15:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
christian.rahmig is currently offline  christian.rahmig
Messages: 293
Registered: January 2016
Senior Member
Dear Jörg,
dear all,

the solution proposal formulated in mentioned Trac tickets aims at adapting the IL model. How about the IS view? Or, to make it concrete:
- Do we need tunnel gates in the infrastructure scheme?
- Do we need to extend the attribute @constructionType for bridges/tunnels to flag bascule bridges?

Any feedback is highly appreciated...

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: [railML3]: special infrastructure in IL - bascule bridge, tunnel gates [message #2642 is a reply to message #2609] Mon, 18 January 2021 17:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Heidrun Jost is currently offline  Heidrun Jost
Messages: 23
Registered: September 2006
Junior Member
Dear all,

for tunnel gate and bascule bridge we need the following elements:

1. position in infrastructure (IS element)

2. conditions for opening and closing: (route setting,
activationCondition, hasTvdSection) analogue to levelCrossingIL
activation/deactivation conditions (IL element)

3. Should we consider more than one track in parallel for a tunnel gate?

Mit freundlichen Grüßen/Best regards
--
Heidrun Jost
Data Manager
Transportation Systems
Thales Deutschland GmbH

Phone: +49 (0) 30 688306 423
Schützenstr. 25 – 10117 Berlin – Germany

Am 06.12.2020 um 06:20 schrieb Joerg von Lingen:
> Dear all,
>
> within railway networks there are special components of infrastructure with
> impact to train operation - bascule bridges, tunnel gates or water barriers.
> Mainly they have some characteristics in common:
>
> 1) They are in infrequent use compared to train operation.
> 2) They have one position supervised by the interlocking for safe train passage.
> 3) If they are not in that position their operation is outside the interlocking,
> e.g. by a local panel.
>
> Thus the modelling in railML would be similar to a keylock. However, there may
> be other data about them needed. The technical time for opening and closing
> process might be of interest for calculating the minimum duration of
> non-availability for train passage. Additional the typical duration of
> non-availability is needed for planning process.
>
> In addition there are networks with more harsh conditions where it is desired to
> keep gates at tunnel portals closed most of the time and open them only for
> train passage. In that case they are fully controlled by interlocking and the
> modelling would be more like level crossing.
>
> The question to you is:
> a) What are the data you need with such infrastructure?
> b) Are there other modes of operation
Re: [railML3]: special infrastructure in IL - bascule bridge, tunnel gates [message #2647 is a reply to message #2639] Sat, 23 January 2021 07:47 Go to previous message
Jörg von Lingen is currently offline  Jörg von Lingen
Messages: 55
Registered: March 2016
Member
Dear Christian,
dear all,

to answer your questions - yes, we will need extensions in IS.

1) We shall have a new element "tunnelGateIS" in functionalInfrstructure, which
shall provide the position of this gate and the relation to the <overcrossing>
(tunnel).
For small tunnels the exact position might be neglectable and just using the
tunnel position. However, for longer tunnels the gates will be controlled
separately and thus we need to know on which end of the tunnel (or even in its
middle) the gate is located.
In the IL scheme the element will be named "tunnelGateIL".

2) The attribute @constructionType may be extended for <undercrossing> (bascule
bridge) to have the information in IS already.


Best regards,
Joerg v. Lingen - Interlocking Coordinator
Am 18.01.2021 um 15:28 schrieb Christian Rahmig:
> Dear Jörg,
> dear all,
>
> the solution proposal formulated in mentioned Trac tickets
> aims at adapting the IL model. How about the IS view? Or, to
> make it concrete:
> - Do we need tunnel gates in the infrastructure scheme?
> - Do we need to extend the attribute @constructionType for
> bridges/tunnels to flag bascule bridges?
>
> Any feedback is highly appreciated...
>
> Thank you very much and best regards
> Christian
Previous Topic: [railML3]: Referencing between IS and IL
Next Topic: [railML3] Train Number Description Field / Beschreibungsfeld für Zugnummern
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Feb 26 11:30:13 CET 2021