Railway system task reliability quantitative evaluation method and device and electronic equipment

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of railway system engineering, and provides a railway system task reliability quantitative evaluation method and device and electronic equipment, and the method comprises the steps: constructing a corresponding task profile according to a railway system; the task profile comprises an event sequence formed by a plurality of events and the duration of each event; determining a function list of each subsystem of the railway corresponding to the event sequence in the task profile; taking the failure of each function in the function list as a top event, constructing a function failure fault tree based on a fault tree construction method, and determining the failure probability of each function in the function failure fault tree; according to the task profile, performing function combination on required functions for supporting the same event, and determining an event tree model based on the event and the functions; and determining a reliability evaluation result of the railway system task. The method closely fits the actual functions of the railway system and the railway transportation process, and can achieve the quantitative evaluation of the task reliability when the railway system completes a specific task from the overall perspective of the system.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of railway system engineering technology, and in particular to methods, devices and electronic equipment for quantitatively assessing the reliability of railway system tasks. Background Art

[0002] As a complex system, the railway system involves numerous subsystems and equipment, and the reliability of each subsystem collectively determines the overall reliability of the railway system. According to the definition of reliability, the reliability of a railway system refers to its ability to perform its intended functions under specified conditions and within a specified time. For the railway system, its primary function is to safely and efficiently transport passengers and goods, providing fundamental support and transportation guarantees for economic and social development. Assessing the railway system's ability to perform its intended functions under specified conditions and within a specified time can be achieved by calculating the railway system's task reliability.

[0003] The assessment of mission reliability primarily focuses on performance and mission completion capabilities during mission execution. In the railway system field, current research largely concentrates on the reliability analysis of subsystems or key components within subsystems, with less emphasis on the reliability of the entire system after integration. This situation, to some extent, limits the comprehensive evaluation and optimization of the overall performance of railway systems. Summary of the Invention

[0004] This invention provides a method, apparatus, and electronic equipment for quantitatively evaluating the reliability of railway system tasks, which can comprehensively and quantitatively evaluate the performance of railway system from the perspective of the whole system and provide a scientific basis for the optimal design of the system.

[0005] This invention provides a method for quantitatively assessing the reliability of railway system tasks, comprising: constructing a corresponding task profile based on the railway system; the task profile including an event sequence consisting of multiple events and the duration of each event; determining the function list of each railway subsystem corresponding to the event sequence in the task profile; constructing a function failure fault tree based on a fault tree construction method, with the failure of each function in the function list as the top event, and determining the failure probability of each function in the function failure fault tree; combining the required functions supporting the same event according to the task profile, and determining an event tree model based on events and functions; and determining the reliability assessment result of the railway system task based on the function failure fault tree, the event tree model, the duration of each event, and the failure probability of each function.

[0006] According to the present invention, a method for quantitatively evaluating the reliability of railway system tasks is provided, which determines the functional list of each railway subsystem corresponding to the event sequence in the task profile, including: determining the system functions required for each event in the task profile; determining each railway subsystem corresponding to the system functions required for each event; and determining the functional list based on the system functions required for each event and the corresponding railway subsystems.

[0007] According to the present invention, a method for quantitatively assessing the reliability of railway system tasks is provided. Based on a functional failure fault tree, an event tree model, the duration of each event, and the failure probability of each function, the reliability assessment result of the railway system tasks is determined. The method includes: using the functional failure fault tree as a sub-element of the functional element in the event tree model, and determining the reliability assessment result of the railway system tasks based on the failure probability of each function and the duration of each event.

[0008] The railway system task reliability quantitative evaluation method provided by the present invention further includes: if at least one function in the combined functions supporting the target event fails, the target event execution fails; if all functions in the combined functions supporting the target event succeed, the target event execution succeeds; wherein the target event is any event in the event sequence.

[0009] According to the present invention, a method for quantitatively assessing the reliability of railway system tasks involves a functional failure fault tree, which is formed by analyzing the causes of functional failure of any subsystem from top to bottom. Determining the failure probability of each function in the functional failure fault tree includes: determining each primary failure item under the functional failure fault tree; determining each secondary failure item under each primary failure item; determining the secondary failure probability of each secondary failure item; determining the primary failure probability of the corresponding primary failure item based on the secondary failure probability of the secondary failure item; and determining the failure probability of the functional failure fault tree based on the primary failure probability of each primary failure item.

[0010] According to the present invention, a method for quantitatively assessing the reliability of railway system tasks includes events such as train start-up, train operation, and train arrival; railway subsystems include at least one of a signaling subsystem, a communication subsystem, a mobile equipment subsystem, a traction power supply system, and an operation management subsystem; functions include at least one of a centralized dispatching system, a station interlocking system, a train operation control system, a communication subsystem, a mobile equipment subsystem, a traction power supply system, and an environmental monitoring system; wherein the signaling subsystem provides the centralized dispatching system, station interlocking system, and train operation control system functions; the communication subsystem provides the communication subsystem functions; the traction power supply system provides the traction power supply system functions; and the operation management subsystem provides the environmental monitoring system functions.

[0011] This invention also provides a railway system task reliability quantitative assessment device, comprising: a task profile module, used to construct a corresponding task profile based on the railway system; the task profile includes an event sequence consisting of multiple events and the duration of each event; a function list module, used to determine the function list of each railway subsystem corresponding to the event sequence in the task profile; a function failure fault tree module, used to construct a function failure fault tree based on a fault tree construction method with each function failure in the function list as the top event, and determine the failure probability of each function in the function failure fault tree; an event tree model module, used to combine the required functions supporting the same event according to the task profile, and determine an event tree model based on events and functions; and an assessment result module, used to determine the reliability assessment result of the railway system task based on the function failure fault tree, the event tree model, the duration of each event, and the failure probability of each function.

[0012] The present invention also provides an electronic device, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor executes the program to implement the railway system task reliability quantitative assessment method as described above.

[0013] The present invention also provides a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the railway system task reliability quantitative evaluation method as described above.

[0014] The present invention also provides a computer program product, including a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the railway system task reliability quantitative evaluation method as described above.

[0015] This invention provides a method, apparatus, and electronic device for quantitatively assessing the reliability of railway system tasks. The method includes: constructing a corresponding task profile based on the railway system; the task profile includes an event sequence consisting of multiple events and the duration of each event; determining the functional list of each railway subsystem corresponding to the event sequence in the task profile; constructing a functional failure fault tree based on a fault tree construction method, with the failure of each function in the functional list as the top event, and determining the failure probability of each function in the functional failure fault tree; combining the required functions supporting the same event according to the task profile to determine an event tree model based on events and functions; and determining the reliability assessment result of the railway system task based on the functional failure fault tree, the event tree model, the duration of each event, and the failure probability of each function. Through the above methods, this invention innovatively proposes a new method for quantitatively assessing the reliability of system tasks. This method closely aligns with the actual functions of the railway system and the railway transportation process, enabling a quantitative assessment of the reliability of the railway system when completing specific tasks from a holistic system perspective. It effectively solves the problem of railway system reliability assessment and has high practical value. Attached Figure Description

[0016] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in this invention or the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of this invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained from these drawings without creative effort.

[0017] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating the railway system task reliability quantitative assessment method provided in this embodiment of the invention.

[0018] Figure 2 This is a schematic cross-sectional view of a passenger transport task in a railway system provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0019] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the train start-up process for a certain passenger transport task in a certain railway system provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0020] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the matching of train start-up and railway subsystem functions provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0021] Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram of the fault tree of the mobile equipment subsystem provided in the embodiment of the present invention.

[0022] Figure 6 This is a schematic diagram of an event tree model for a passenger transport task in a railway system provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0023] Figure 7This is a schematic diagram of the structure of the railway system task reliability quantitative evaluation device provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0024] Figure 8 This is a schematic diagram of the physical structure of the electronic device provided in an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0025] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this invention clearer, the technical solutions of this invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some, not all, of the embodiments of this invention. All other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art based on the embodiments of this invention without creative effort are within the scope of protection of this invention.

[0026] This invention provides a method for quantitatively evaluating the reliability of railway system tasks. Considering the limitations of existing reliability studies in the railway field, this invention explores and designs a new method suitable for the quantitative evaluation of railway system task reliability from the perspective of the system as a whole. This method is used to comprehensively and quantitatively evaluate the performance of the railway system and provide a scientific basis for the optimal design of the system.

[0027] Please see Figure 1 , Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating the railway system task reliability quantitative assessment method provided in an embodiment of the present invention. In this embodiment, the railway system task reliability quantitative assessment method may include steps S110 to S150, and the specific steps are as follows: S110: Construct the corresponding task profile based on the railway system; the task profile includes an event sequence consisting of multiple events and the duration of each event.

[0028] S120: Determine the functional list of each railway subsystem corresponding to the event sequence in the task profile.

[0029] S130: Using the failure of each function in the function list as the top event, construct a function failure fault tree based on the fault tree construction method, and determine the failure probability of each function in the function failure fault tree.

[0030] S140: Based on the task profile, combine the required functions to support the same event to determine an event tree model based on events and functions.

[0031] S150: Determine the reliability assessment results of railway system tasks based on the functional failure fault tree, event tree model, duration of each event, and probability of failure of each function.

[0032] As an important mode of transportation, the railway system's main function is to transport passengers and goods, i.e., to complete passenger transport or freight transport tasks. In this embodiment, the task profile is obtained by analyzing the temporal sequence of events and environments experienced during the completion of different tasks.

[0033] The task profile includes an event sequence consisting of multiple events and the duration of each event. Optionally, the event sequence represents the key nodes and main activities in the railway task execution process, and the duration of each event reflects the distribution and rhythm of the task over time. The task profile provides a time frame and basic task structure for subsequent reliability assessment.

[0034] It should be added that a mission profile is a temporal description of the events and environment experienced during the mission's completion, and it analyzes the collaborative working capability of complex equipment systems under the influence of the external environment. Commonly used mission reliability analysis methods include reliability block diagrams, fault tree analysis, Bayesian methods, etc., which conduct reliability studies by constructing relevant models.

[0035] Please see Figure 2 , Figure 2 This is a schematic cross-sectional view of a passenger transport task in a railway system provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0036] The event sequence of a passenger transport task profile can include train start-up events, train operation events, and train arrival events. The horizontal axis represents time in minutes, and the vertical axis represents altitude in kilometers.

[0037] For each event in the task profile, the functions required by each railway subsystem are determined, a function list is formed, the specific tasks and responsibilities of each subsystem in different events are clarified, and the complex railway system is decomposed into specific functional modules, laying the foundation for subsequent failure analysis and reliability modeling.

[0038] Furthermore, a fault tree is constructed using the functional failures in the functional list as the top events. Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) is then applied to conduct a systematic and comprehensive logical analysis of the functional failures, identifying potential causes from multiple levels and perspectives, including hardware failures, software defects, human error, and environmental factors. By determining the probability of each functional failure, quantitative analysis methods are used to evaluate the fault tree, obtaining the probability value of each functional failure, which provides a quantitative basis for subsequent reliability assessments.

[0039] Based on the task profile, functions supporting the same event are combined to construct an event tree analysis (ETA) model based on events and functions. The event tree model uses events as clues and combines functional nodes to show the task progress path and possible results of the railway system in the process of executing a task, starting from the initial event, under different normal and failure conditions of functions. It can clearly reflect the impact of functional failure on the success or failure of the event.

[0040] Finally, by comprehensively utilizing the multi-source information obtained above, such as the functional failure fault tree, event tree model, duration of each event, and failure probability of each function, a reliability assessment algorithm is used for comprehensive analysis and calculation. The final result is the reliability assessment of the railway system task, which presents the reliability of the railway system in completing the task under a specific task profile in a quantitative form.

[0041] Optionally, if at least one of the combined functions supporting the target event fails, the target event execution fails; if all the combined functions supporting the target event succeed, the target event execution succeeds; wherein the target event is any event in the event sequence.

[0042] In related technologies, if only the reliability of a single subsystem or key component of a railway is focused on, even if its reliability is very high, the failure of other subsystems may still affect the normal operation of the entire system, thereby reducing the overall reliability of the system.

[0043] Therefore, this embodiment determines that the successful execution of an event depends on the success of all functions in its combined functions. The target event is considered successful only if all functions constituting the target event are functioning correctly. If any function in the combined functions of the target event fails, the target event is considered to have failed.

[0044] For example, the successful passage of a train through a station requires the simultaneous success of multiple functions, such as the signal system providing signal display, the communication system accurately transmitting dispatch instructions, and the track circuit detecting the train's position. If any one of these functions is missing, the train's passage through the station may not be successful.

[0045] For example, in the target event of train braking, if the braking command transmission function is normal, but the braking actuator malfunctions, then the train braking event will fail.

[0046] The present invention provides a method for quantitatively assessing the reliability of railway system tasks. This method comprehensively and systematically considers all aspects and elements in the execution process of railway system tasks, including different subsystems, various functions, and their interactions and influences. Through reliability modeling and analysis methods such as fault trees and event trees, combined with quantitative failure probabilities and time factors, it accurately assesses the reliability level of railway system tasks. This method closely aligns with the actual functions of railway systems and the railway transportation process, and can achieve a quantitative assessment of the reliability of railway systems when completing specific tasks from a holistic system perspective. It effectively solves the problem of railway system reliability assessment and has high practical value.

[0047] Based on any of the above embodiments, the step of determining the functional list of each railway subsystem corresponding to the event sequence in the task profile may specifically include: Determine the system functions required for each event in the task profile; determine the railway subsystems corresponding to the system functions required for each event; and determine the function list based on the system functions required for each event and the corresponding railway subsystems.

[0048] In this embodiment, each event of the railway system task is analyzed to identify the key system functions required to complete the event. For example, a train entering a station event requires the station interlocking system to provide precise route control, the train braking system to provide braking control and execution, and the wireless communication system to provide dispatching command transmission.

[0049] The system functions identified above are precisely matched with the specific subsystems of the railway. For example, route control functions correspond to the signaling subsystem, braking control and execution functions correspond to the moving equipment subsystem, and dispatching instruction receiving functions correspond to the communication subsystem, etc.

[0050] Finally, all events and their corresponding functions and subsystems are summarized to generate a complete and detailed function list. This function list can include the system functions associated with each event during the execution of tasks within the railway system, as well as the subsystems they belong to, providing a clear and systematic functional basis for subsequent reliability assessments.

[0051] Based on any of the above embodiments, the steps for determining the reliability assessment results of railway system tasks according to the functional failure fault tree, event tree model, duration of each event, and probability of each functional failure may specifically include: By using the functional failure fault tree as a sub-element of the functional elements in the event tree model, the reliability assessment results of the railway system tasks are determined based on the failure probability of each function and the duration of each event.

[0052] In this embodiment, the functional failure fault tree and the event tree model are linked and integrated, with the functional failure fault tree serving as a subordinate element of the functional element in the event tree model. This linkage method constructs a more comprehensive and detailed system reliability model. It integrates the reliability characteristics of functions into the entire event development logic, fully considering the impact of functional failures on the event trajectory, and providing a more accurate model foundation for subsequent reliability assessments.

[0053] Optionally, the failure probability of each function is determined based on a large amount of historical data, experimental data, and industry standards. These probability values ​​reflect the likelihood of each function failing during actual operation, providing a quantitative basis for subsequent reliability assessments.

[0054] Furthermore, this embodiment incorporates the duration of each event into the reliability assessment, as the duration of different events has a significant impact on the overall system reliability. For example, if an event has a long duration and certain critical functions have a high probability of failure during that event, then the impact of that part on system reliability will be more significant throughout the entire task cycle. Considering the duration of events can make the reliability assessment results more consistent with reality.

[0055] Finally, based on the constructed correlation model, the reliability of the railway system tasks is comprehensively evaluated by using factors such as functional failure probability and event duration through reliability assessment algorithms (such as probability theory and mathematical statistics), and the reliability assessment results of the railway system tasks are finally determined.

[0056] Therefore, this embodiment combines functional failure fault trees with event tree models, fully considering the impact of functional failures on event outcomes and the role of time factors. This makes the reliability assessment more comprehensive and detailed, more realistically reflecting the actual reliability of railway system tasks and avoiding assessment errors caused by neglecting certain key factors. Furthermore, through the correlation model, potential risk points in railway system tasks can be identified more clearly. For example, which functional failures have a greater impact on the successful completion of the entire task, and at which event stages does the system face higher risks.

[0057] Based on any of the above embodiments, the functional failure fault tree is formed by analyzing the causes of functional failure of any subsystem step by step from top to bottom; the step of determining the probability of each functional failure in the functional failure fault tree may specifically include: Identify the primary fault items under the functional failure fault tree; identify the secondary fault items under each primary fault item; determine the secondary failure probability of each secondary fault item; determine the primary failure probability of the corresponding primary fault item based on the secondary failure probability of the secondary fault item; determine the failure probability of the functional failure fault tree based on the primary failure probability of each primary fault item.

[0058] In this embodiment, the analysis starts from the top event of the functional failure fault tree and analyzes the first-level failure items. For each first-level failure item, the analysis further analyzes the underlying failure causes that led to its occurrence, namely the second-level failure items.

[0059] Determine the failure probability of each secondary failure item under specific operating environment and conditions. Optionally, the failure probability can be determined based on information such as historical failure data, experimental test results, reliability parameters provided by the manufacturer, and industry experience. For example, the secondary failure probability of a communication line can be calculated by statistically analyzing the number of failures and operating time of the communication line over the past year.

[0060] The first-level failure probability of the corresponding first-level failure item is determined based on the second-level failure probability. Optionally, Boolean algebra and probability operation rules in probability theory can be used, combined with the failure probabilities of each second-level failure item, to calculate the failure probability of the corresponding first-level failure item.

[0061] For example, if the communication line fault, signal transmission module fault, and signal receiving module fault under the level of brake command transmission failure are related by an "OR" gate (that is, if any one of them fails, it will lead to brake command transmission failure), then the failure probability of this level of failure can be calculated according to the "OR" gate probability formula.

[0062] Finally, following the logical relationships in the fault tree, the failure probabilities of each first-level fault item are comprehensively calculated to obtain the failure probability of the top event (subsystem functional failure) in the functional failure fault tree, i.e., the functional failure probability.

[0063] Optionally, the event includes at least one of a train start event, a train run event, and a train arrival event.

[0064] Optionally, the railway subsystems include at least one of the following: signaling subsystem, communication subsystem, moving equipment subsystem, traction power supply system, and operation management subsystem.

[0065] Optionally, the functions include at least one of the following: centralized dispatching system functions, station interlocking system functions, train operation control system functions, communication subsystem functions, mobile equipment subsystem functions, traction power supply system functions, and environmental monitoring system functions.

[0066] The signaling subsystem provides functions for the centralized dispatching system, station interlocking system, and train operation control system; the communication subsystem provides functions for the communication subsystem; the traction power supply system provides functions for the traction power supply system; and the operation management subsystem provides functions for the environmental monitoring system.

[0067] This invention provides a method for quantitatively evaluating the reliability of railway system tasks. In other embodiments, it may specifically include the following steps: S1: Construct a task profile based on the functions of the railway system.

[0068] For example, the events that a railway system needs to go through to complete passenger transport tasks mainly include train departure, train operation, and train arrival at the station. Given that a train passes through multiple stations from its originating station to its destination, and due to different stopping plans, the task profile for completing the corresponding passenger transport task presents a repetitive process of the event sequence "train departure—train operation—train arrival at the station." In particular, direct trains do not stop in between from their originating station to their destination, and their task profile is as follows: Figure 2 As shown.

[0069] S2: Based on the event sequence in the task profile, analyze the specific process and duration of each event.

[0070] Taking the completion of passenger transport tasks in the railway system as an example, according to the task profile constructed in step S1, train departure is an important event in the task profile. Before the train departs, a series of departure operation procedures need to be completed sequentially, including: the dispatch center issuing the operation adjustment plan, the station receiving and converting instructions, and the interlocking system arranging the route. These procedures are interconnected and closely coordinated to ensure that the train departure instruction can be issued safely and accurately, thereby ensuring that the train departs on time. At the same time, due to differences in equipment configuration and personnel proficiency at different stations, the duration of departure operations will also vary. It is necessary to determine the departure operation time of each station, that is, to calculate the time required from the issuance of the departure instruction to the actual start of the train.

[0071] S3: Analyze the relationship between the completion of the event sequence and the functional support of various railway subsystems.

[0072] Specifically, based on the analysis results of step S2, any event in the task profile requires the cooperation and coordination of various railway subsystems during execution to stably perform their respective functions in order to support the completion of the railway system's tasks.

[0073] Taking the train start-up event as an example, the completion of this event involves a series of operational procedures, requiring the railway dispatching centralized system, station interlocking system, and other systems to function and support the completion of the start-up operation procedures.

[0074] S4: Compile a list of railway subsystem functions required to support the completion of each event sequence in the task profile.

[0075] Specifically, based on the analysis results of step S3, the various functions required to complete each event in the task profile are sorted out and summarized to form a function list.

[0076] S5: Using the failure of each function in the function list as the top event, construct a function failure fault tree based on the fault tree construction method, and conduct fault tree analysis to determine the probability of function failure.

[0077] Specifically, for the function list formed in step S4, each function failure is taken as the top event, and the functions are decomposed and analyzed step by step from top to bottom to find all possible causes of the failure of the top event, form a fault tree, evaluate the probability of each failure cause, and calculate the failure probability of the top event.

[0078] S6: Based on the task profile, establish an event tree model based on events and functions.

[0079] Specifically, based on the analysis results of step S3, each event requires the support of multiple functions to complete. The functions required to support the completion of the same event are combined, and an event tree model based on events and functions is formed based on the task profile constructed in step S1. If any function in the combination fails, it indicates that the corresponding event cannot be supported and the task execution is unsuccessful; if all functions work together to support the completion of all events in the task profile, the task execution is successful.

[0080] S7: The functional failure fault tree is used as a subordinate element of the functional element in the event tree model. Based on the functional failure probability and the duration of each event completion, the probability of the railway system completing the task can be obtained according to the event tree analysis method, that is, the task reliability.

[0081] Specifically, based on the event tree constructed in step S6, considering the event duration and functional failure probability in the task profile, the probability of successful task execution is calculated, thus obtaining the system task reliability.

[0082] Based on this, compared with related technologies, the embodiments of the present invention, starting from the definition of railway system task reliability, and by fully integrating existing reliability assessment methods, innovatively propose a new quantitative assessment method for system task reliability. This method closely aligns with the actual functions of the railway system and the railway transportation process, enabling a quantitative assessment of the railway system's task reliability when completing specific tasks. It effectively solves the difficult problem of railway system reliability assessment and has high practical value.

[0083] Based on the above embodiments, a preferred example takes a railway line as the research object and conducts a quantitative assessment of the reliability of a passenger transport mission by the railway system as an example. The preferred example is described in detail according to the steps of the present invention.

[0084] S1: A railway line, during a passenger transport mission, has the following route planning and stopping scheme: It passes through 6 stations from the originating station to the terminal station, with the train passing through all without stopping. Under specified conditions and within a specified time period, the events experienced include train departure, train operation, and train arrival at stations. Considering the railway operating environment (such as changes in altitude), the task profile is formed based on the changes in the sequence of events and the environment, for example... Figure 2 .

[0085] S2: For the train start-up, train operation, and train arrival events in the task profile, analyze the specific process for each event. Taking the train start-up event as an example, the issuance of the train departure instruction requires a certain process, specifically including the dispatch center issuing the operation adjustment plan, the station receiving and converting the instruction, the interlocking system arranging the route, the station duty officer confirming the departure conditions, the departure instruction being issued, and the driver confirming and starting the train.

[0086] Please see Figure 3 , Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the train start-up process for a certain passenger transport task in a certain railway system provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0087] The interactive entities involved may include the Centralized Train Control (CTC) system, dispatch center, station automated control system, station, train, driver, station interlocking system, train control onboard equipment, station duty officer, GSM-R wireless communication system, and wireless train dispatching system. Some interactive entities may communicate with each other via communication signals.

[0088] Furthermore, assuming the time from the issuance of the train departure instruction to the actual start of the train is... ,generally It will not exceed 1 minute, but there may be slight delays due to factors such as ticket checking and passenger boarding. Assuming the train journey lasts for... , It is entirely determined by the train's operating speed and the length of the station section. Assuming the time from the issuance of the train entry instruction to the train's arrival at the station is... When high-speed trains typically enter the station, For regular-speed trains, the time is no more than 3 minutes. It usually takes 3-5 minutes.

[0089] S3: Based on the analysis results of S2, the completion of each event in the train's passenger transport mission is matched with the functional support relationship of each railway subsystem.

[0090] Specifically, taking a train start-up event as an example, the dispatch center first issues the operation adjustment plan to the station's automated control unit (ACU) through the centralized dispatching system (CTC). After receiving the plan, the ACU automatically converts the train operation adjustment plan into a train route instruction sequence and issues route control commands to the interlocking system. In this process, both the CTC and the ACU perform their respective functions. Since the ACU is an important component of the CTC, this process is closely related to the CTC's functions, and this process can be matched with the CTC's functionality.

[0091] Secondly, the station interlocking system arranges routes according to the received route control commands. After the route arrangement is completed, the station interlocking system sends the receiving route advance information to the onboard train control equipment via the GSM-R wireless communication system or the wireless train dispatching system. Since the GSM-R wireless communication system and the wireless train dispatching system belong to the railway communication subsystem, the station interlocking system, the communication subsystem, and the train operation control system all play their respective functions in this process. This process is matched with the functions of the station interlocking system, the communication subsystem, and the train operation control system, respectively.

[0092] Finally, after confirming the departure conditions, the station duty officer issues a departure instruction to the driver via the GSM-R wireless communication system or the wireless train dispatching system. Upon receiving the departure instruction, the driver confirms that the onboard equipment is functioning normally before starting the train. This process requires the communication subsystem to perform its functions, and the procedure is designed to be compatible with the communication subsystem's functionality.

[0093] Please see Figure 4 , Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the matching of train start-up and railway subsystem functions provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0094] S4: Based on the analysis results of step S3, the functional support relationships of various railway subsystems required for the train to complete all events during the passenger transport mission were obtained. By sorting out the various functions, a functional list was formed as follows:

[0095] Table 1 is a list of functions of various railway subsystems that support passenger transport tasks, which provides the main support functions required to complete various events such as train start-up, train operation, and train arrival at the station.

[0096] The train start-up event requires 4 main supporting functions, the train operation event requires 7 main supporting functions, and the train arrival event requires 4 main supporting functions. Through summarization and analysis, a total of 7 main functions are identified for completing all events. The function list is thus determined to include 7 functions: mobile equipment subsystem function, centralized dispatching system (CTC) function, station interlocking system function, train operation control system function, communication subsystem function, traction power supply system function, and environmental monitoring system function, denoted as follows: k , k =1,2,…7.

[0097] S5: For the function list formed in step S4, each function failure in the function list is taken as the top event, and a corresponding fault tree is constructed based on the fault tree construction method. The function list obtained in step S4 contains a total of 7 functions. In this embodiment, the failure of the mobile equipment subsystem in the function list is taken as an example. According to the fault tree construction method and combined with the structural composition of the railway mobile equipment subsystem, the causes of the failure of the mobile equipment subsystem are analyzed step by step from top to bottom, and a fault tree is formed. The corresponding fault tree diagram is shown below.

[0098] Please see Figure 5 , Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram of the fault tree of the mobile equipment subsystem provided in the embodiment of the present invention.

[0099] Among them, the first-level fault items of the mobile equipment subsystem failure can include vehicle body failure, traction transmission system failure, bogie and auxiliary system failure, external environmental influence, main power supply system failure, main power supply braking system failure, air supply braking system failure, network control system failure, etc.

[0100] The secondary fault items corresponding to the car body faults can include coupler buffer device faults, door faults, underframe faults, driver's cab faults, end wall faults, etc.

[0101] Secondary fault items corresponding to traction drive system faults can include traction transformer faults, traction converter faults, traction motor faults, etc.

[0102] Secondary fault items corresponding to bogie and auxiliary system failures can include axle box assembly failure, wheelset failure, drive unit failure, frame failure, primary suspension failure, secondary suspension failure, wheel flange lubrication failure, etc.

[0103] Level 2 failure items corresponding to external environmental impacts can include severe weather such as rainstorms and impacts from foreign objects.

[0104] Secondary fault items corresponding to main power supply braking system faults may include pantograph faults, voltage transformer faults, surge arrester faults, current transformer faults, vacuum circuit breaker faults, etc.

[0105] Secondary fault items corresponding to air supply braking system failures can include brake control system failures, basic braking device failures, air supply device failures, anti-skid equipment failures, sand spreading equipment failures, etc.

[0106] Secondary fault items corresponding to network control system failures can include locomotive control system failures, vehicle control system failures, and human-machine interface display screen failures.

[0107] Based on the constructed fault tree, the failure probability of each bottom event in the fault tree is obtained by collecting historical data, and the failure probability of the top event is calculated according to the fault tree analysis method.

[0108] This embodiment mainly describes the method for calculating mission reliability, assuming that the failure probability of each base event in the fault tree of the mobile equipment subsystem is P. i The failure probability of the top event can be calculated as P1. Using a similar method, the failure probabilities of the remaining six functions in the function list are obtained, denoted as P. k , k =2,3,…7, as shown in Table 2. Table 2 shows the failure probability of each subsystem of the railway. S6: Based on the analysis results of step S3, it is clear that completing each event in the passenger transport task requires the coordinated cooperation of different railway subsystem functions. If any function fails, the corresponding event cannot be completed, causing the railway system to be unable to complete the prescribed passenger transport task under the specified conditions and within the specified time. Based on the task profile constructed in step S1, an event tree model based on events and functions is formed.

[0110] Please see Figure 6 , Figure 6 This is a schematic diagram of an event tree model for a passenger transport task in a railway system provided in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0111] As shown in Table 1, train start-up events mainly require the coordinated operation of the centralized dispatching system, station interlocking system, train operation control system, and communication subsystem. These four functions are combined and named Function Combination 1, as shown in Table 2. Figure 6 If any function in function combination 1 fails, the train start event will fail to execute; only when all functions in function combination 1 work together can the train start event be executed successfully, and then the next event can begin to be executed.

[0112] According to the task profile, the next event is the train operation event. Table 1 shows that completing this event requires the coordinated operation of seven functions. These seven functions are combined and named Function Combination 2, as shown in Table 2. If all functions in Function Combination 2 are functioning correctly, the train start event is successfully executed, and the next event continues, and so on, until the last event in the task profile is completed (e.g., ...). Figure 6 Only when the train arrives at the station can the entire passenger transport mission be considered successfully completed.

[0113] It should be noted that the train may reduce its speed during operation. Even if all events in the mission profile are completed subsequently, if the passenger transport mission is not completed within the specified time, it is considered a downgraded completion of the mission, which does not meet the definition of mission reliability and will not be included in the statistical scope when quantitatively assessing mission reliability.

[0114] S7: By treating the functional failure fault tree as a subordinate element of the functional element in the event tree model, the probability of failure for any combination of functions can be calculated based on the functional failure probability. Furthermore, by combining this with the time required to complete each event, the likelihood of task success, i.e., task reliability, can be calculated. Through calculation, it can be obtained that... Failure probability of function combination 1 for: ; Failure probability of function combination 2 for: ; Failure probability of function combination 3 for: .

[0115] Therefore, the reliability of a railway system in completing a certain passenger transport task for: .

[0116] In the above formula, Indicates the duration of the train start-up event; Indicates the duration of a train operation event within a given section; This represents the duration of the train arrival event, taking into account that the events are independent of each other within a unit of time. Thus, by inputting the relevant data, a quantitative assessment of task reliability can be achieved.

[0117] It should be noted that when the railway system completes passenger transport tasks, the train operation plans vary due to different passenger demands. That is, the starting station, destination station, and stop stations of the train are different, resulting in different task profiles for different passenger transport tasks. However, all task profiles are based on several repetitive processes of the basic event sequence of "train start-up - train operation - train arrival". The specific example given in this embodiment is the case where the task profile contains one event sequence, but regardless of how many repetitive event sequences the task profile contains, the quantitative evaluation method for task reliability is the same.

[0118] The present invention also provides a railway system task reliability quantitative assessment device. The railway system task reliability quantitative assessment device provided by the present invention is described below. The railway system task reliability quantitative assessment device described below and the railway system task reliability quantitative assessment method described above can be referred to in correspondence.

[0119] Please see Figure 7 , Figure 7 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of a railway system task reliability quantitative evaluation device provided in an embodiment of the present invention. In this embodiment, the railway system task reliability quantitative evaluation device may include a task profile module 710, a function list module 720, a function failure fault tree module 730, an event tree model module 740, and an evaluation result module 750.

[0120] The task profile module 710 is used to construct a corresponding task profile based on the railway system; the task profile includes an event sequence consisting of multiple events and the duration of each event.

[0121] Function list module 720 is used to determine the function list of each railway subsystem corresponding to the event sequence in the task profile.

[0122] The Function Failure Fault Tree Module 730 is used to construct a function failure fault tree based on the fault tree construction method, with each function failure in the function list as the top event, and to determine the failure probability of each function in the function failure fault tree.

[0123] Event tree model module 740 is used to combine the required functions to support the same event based on the task profile, and determine the event tree model based on events and functions.

[0124] The evaluation results module 750 is used to determine the reliability evaluation results of railway system tasks based on the functional failure fault tree, event tree model, duration of each event, and probability of failure of each function.

[0125] Based on any of the above embodiments, the function list module 720 can specifically be used for: Determine the system functions required for each event in the task profile; determine the railway subsystems corresponding to the system functions required for each event; and determine the function list based on the system functions required for each event and the corresponding railway subsystems.

[0126] Based on any of the above embodiments, the evaluation result module 750 can specifically be used for: By using the functional failure fault tree as a sub-element of the functional elements in the event tree model, the reliability assessment results of the railway system tasks are determined based on the failure probability of each function and the duration of each event.

[0127] Based on any of the above embodiments, the evaluation result module 750 can also be used for: If at least one of the combined functions supporting the target event fails, the target event execution fails; if all the combined functions supporting the target event succeed, the target event execution succeeds; where the target event is any event in the event sequence.

[0128] Based on any of the above embodiments, the functional failure fault tree is formed by analyzing the causes of functional failure of any subsystem step by step from top to bottom; the functional failure fault tree module 730 can specifically be used for: Identify the primary fault items under the functional failure fault tree; identify the secondary fault items under each primary fault item; determine the secondary failure probability of each secondary fault item; determine the primary failure probability of the corresponding primary fault item based on the secondary failure probability of the secondary fault item; determine the failure probability of the functional failure fault tree based on the primary failure probability of each primary fault item.

[0129] Based on any of the above embodiments, the event includes at least one of a train start event, a train operation event, and a train arrival event; the railway subsystems include at least one of a signaling subsystem, a communication subsystem, a mobile equipment subsystem, a traction power supply system, and an operation management subsystem; the functions include at least one of a centralized dispatching system function, a station interlocking system function, a train operation control system function, a communication subsystem function, a mobile equipment subsystem function, a traction power supply system function, and an environmental monitoring system function; wherein, the signaling subsystem is used to provide the centralized dispatching system function, the station interlocking system function, and the train operation control system function; the communication subsystem is used to provide the communication subsystem function; the traction power supply system is used to provide the traction power supply system function; and the operation management subsystem is used to provide the environmental monitoring system function.

[0130] On the other hand, embodiments of the present invention also provide an electronic device, please refer to... Figure 8 , Figure 8 This is a schematic diagram of the physical structure of the electronic device provided in the embodiments of the present invention, such as... Figure 8As shown, the electronic device may include a memory 820, a processor 810, and a computer program stored in the memory 820 and executable on the processor 810. When the processor 810 executes the program, it can implement a method for quantitatively evaluating the reliability of railway system tasks. This method may include: Based on the railway system, a corresponding task profile is constructed. The task profile includes an event sequence consisting of multiple events and the duration of each event. The functional list of each railway subsystem corresponding to the event sequence in the task profile is determined. Taking the failure of each function in the functional list as the top event, a functional failure fault tree is constructed based on the fault tree construction method, and the failure probability of each function in the functional failure fault tree is determined. Based on the task profile, the required functions supporting the same event are combined to determine an event tree model based on events and functions. Based on the functional failure fault tree, the event tree model, the duration of each event, and the failure probability of each function, the reliability assessment results of the railway system task are determined.

[0131] Optionally, the electronic device may further include a communication bus 830 and a communication interface 840, wherein the processor 810, the communication interface 840, and the memory 820 communicate with each other through the communication bus 830. The processor 810 can call the computer program in the memory 820 to execute the railway system task reliability quantitative assessment method provided by the above methods.

[0132] Furthermore, the logical instructions in the aforementioned memory 820 can be implemented as software functional units and, when sold or used as independent products, can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present invention, or the part that contributes to the prior art, or a part of the technical solution, can be embodied in the form of a software product. This computer software product is stored in a storage medium and includes several instructions to cause a computer device (which may be a personal computer, server, or network device, etc.) to execute all or part of the steps of the methods described in the various embodiments of the present invention. The aforementioned storage medium includes various media capable of storing program code, such as USB flash drives, portable hard drives, read-only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), magnetic disks, or optical disks.

[0133] On the other hand, the present invention also provides a computer program product, which includes a computer program that can be stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium. When the computer program is executed by a processor, the computer can execute the railway system task reliability quantitative evaluation method provided by the above methods. The steps and principles of the method have been described in detail in the above methods and will not be repeated here.

[0134] In another aspect, the present invention also provides a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the railway system task reliability quantitative assessment method provided by the above methods. The steps and principles of the method have been described in detail in the above methods and will not be repeated here.

[0135] Non-transitory computer-readable storage media can be any available medium or data storage device that can be accessed by a processor, including but not limited to magnetic storage (e.g., floppy disks, hard disks, magnetic tapes, magneto-optical disks (MOs), etc.), optical storage (e.g., CDs, DVDs, BDs, HVDs, etc.), and semiconductor storage (e.g., ROMs, EPROMs, EEPROMs, non-volatile memory (NAND flash), solid-state drives (SSDs)).

[0136] The device embodiments described above are merely illustrative. The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separate. The components shown as units may or may not be physical units; that is, they may be located in one place or distributed across multiple network units. Some or all of the modules can be selected to achieve the purpose of this embodiment according to actual needs. Those skilled in the art can understand and implement this without any creative effort.

[0137] Through the above description of the embodiments, those skilled in the art can clearly understand that each embodiment can be implemented by means of software plus necessary general-purpose hardware platforms, and of course, it can also be implemented by hardware. Based on this understanding, the above technical solutions, in essence or the part that contributes to the prior art, can be embodied in the form of a software product. This computer software product can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium, such as ROM / RAM, magnetic disk, optical disk, etc., and includes several instructions to cause a computer device (which may be a personal computer, server, or network device, etc.) to execute the methods described in the various embodiments or some parts of the embodiments.

[0138] Finally, it should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention, and not to limit them; although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications can still be made to the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments, or equivalent substitutions can be made to some of the technical features; and these modifications or substitutions do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to deviate from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for quantitatively evaluating the reliability of railway system tasks, characterized in that, include: A corresponding task profile is constructed based on the railway system; the task profile includes an event sequence consisting of multiple events and the duration of each event; Determine the functional list of each railway subsystem corresponding to the event sequence in the task profile; Using the failure of each function in the function list as the top event, a function failure fault tree is constructed based on the fault tree construction method, and the failure probability of each function in the function failure fault tree is determined. Based on the task profile, the required functions supporting the same event are combined to determine an event tree model based on events and functions. Based on the functional failure fault tree, the event tree model, the duration of each event, and the failure probability of each function, the reliability assessment results of the railway system tasks are determined.

2. The method for quantitatively evaluating the reliability of railway system tasks according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process of determining the functional list of each railway subsystem corresponding to the event sequence in the task profile includes: Determine the system functions required for each event in the task profile; Determine the railway subsystems corresponding to the system functions required for each of the aforementioned events; The list of functions is determined based on the system functions required for each event and the corresponding railway subsystems.

3. The method for quantitatively evaluating the reliability of railway system tasks according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process of determining the reliability assessment results of railway system tasks based on the functional failure fault tree, the event tree model, the duration of each event, and the probability of each functional failure includes: The functional failure fault tree is used as a sub-element of the functional elements in the event tree model. Based on the failure probability of each function and the duration of each event, the reliability assessment result of the railway system task is determined.

4. The method for quantitatively evaluating the reliability of railway system tasks according to claim 1, characterized in that, Also includes: If at least one of the combined functions supporting the target event fails, the target event execution fails. If all the combined functions supporting the target event succeed, then the target event is executed successfully; wherein the target event is any event in the event sequence.

5. The method for quantitatively evaluating the reliability of railway system tasks according to any one of claims 1 to 4, characterized in that, The functional failure fault tree is formed by analyzing the causes of functional failure of any subsystem step by step from top to bottom; determining the failure probability of each function in the functional failure fault tree includes: Identify each primary fault item under the aforementioned functional failure fault tree; Identify the various secondary fault items under each primary fault item; Determine the second-level failure probability of each of the second-level fault items; The first-level failure probability of the corresponding first-level failure item is determined based on the second-level failure probability of the second-level failure item. The failure probability of the functional failure fault tree is determined based on the first-level failure probability of each first-level failure item.

6. The method for quantitatively evaluating the reliability of railway system tasks according to any one of claims 1 to 4, characterized in that, The event includes at least one of the train start event, the train operation event, and the train arrival event; The railway subsystems include at least one of the following: signaling subsystem, communication subsystem, mobile equipment subsystem, traction power supply system, and operation management subsystem; The functions include at least one of the following: centralized dispatching system functions, station interlocking system functions, train operation control system functions, communication subsystem functions, mobile equipment subsystem functions, traction power supply system functions, and environmental monitoring system functions. The signaling subsystem provides the functions of the centralized dispatching system, the station interlocking system, and the train operation control system; the communication subsystem provides the functions of the communication subsystem; the traction power supply system provides the functions of the traction power supply system; and the operation management subsystem provides the functions of the environmental monitoring system.

7. A quantitative assessment device for the reliability of railway system tasks, characterized in that, include: The task profile module is used to construct a corresponding task profile based on the railway system; the task profile includes an event sequence consisting of multiple events and the duration of each event; The function list module is used to determine the function list of each railway subsystem corresponding to the event sequence in the task profile; The functional failure fault tree module is used to construct a functional failure fault tree based on the fault tree construction method, with each functional failure in the functional list as the top event, and to determine the failure probability of each function in the functional failure fault tree. The event tree model module is used to combine the required functions to support the same event according to the task profile, and determine the event tree model based on events and functions. The evaluation results module is used to determine the reliability evaluation results of railway system tasks based on the functional failure fault tree, the event tree model, the duration of each event, and the failure probability of each function.

8. An electronic device comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and running on the processor, characterized in that, When the processor executes the computer program, it implements the railway system task reliability quantitative evaluation method as described in any one of claims 1 to 6.

9. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements the railway system task reliability quantitative evaluation method as described in any one of claims 1 to 6.

10. A computer program product, comprising a computer program, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements the railway system task reliability quantitative evaluation method as described in any one of claims 1 to 6.

Images