Steel rail damage assessment method and device

Abstract

The invention provides a steel rail damage assessment method and device. The method comprises the following steps that a to-be-detected steel rail is segmented according to the unit length; collecting measurement parameters of a plurality of mutually independent damages in a steel rail section; calculating the unavailability probability of each mutually independent damage according to the measurement parameters; the steel rail availability probability of the steel rail section is obtained through the unavailability probability of the mutually independent damage; and substituting the steel rail available probability into a corresponding comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the steel rail damage degree of the steel rail section. The invention further provides a corresponding steel rail damage assessment device. According to the method, the damage state of the steel rail can be scientifically and quantitatively evaluated, an evaluation method for coexistence of various damages is provided, and targeted maintenance means are guided to be adopted according to the evaluation result, so that development of the steel rail damages is effectively prevented and slowed down, and the service life of the steel rail is prolonged.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the technical field related to track monitoring and maintenance, and in particular to a method and device for evaluating rail damage. Background Art

[0002] Rail damage is a problem that cannot be ignored in railway transportation. There are many types of damage and the causes are complex. Common damages include fish scales, peeling, corrugation, abrasions, fat edges, vertical wear, side wear, etc. These damages not only affect the riding comfort and reduce the service life of the rails, but also pose a major threat to driving safety.

[0003] Currently, the industry mainly uses the "minor and severe damage" method to evaluate and maintain the damage status of rails. Taking urban rail transit with a speed of less than 120km / h as an example, when the rails are scratched, if the scratch depth exceeds 1mm, the rail damage is minor; if the scratch depth exceeds 2mm, the rail damage is major. Scratches that are close to or reach minor injuries can be repaired by grinding or milling. If the scratches reach the severe injury standard, the rails need to be replaced in time. The "minor and severe damage" method is suitable for evaluating most common damage to rails.

[0004] The existing methods have the following problems: (1) Failure to achieve quantification of damage status scores. For a specific type of damage, the "minor and severe damage" method simply divides the damage degree into three sections: less than minor damage, minor damage, and severe damage. There is no distinction between the same damage degree within the same section. Since quantification of scores is not achieved, within the same section, the damage status of the rails cannot be compared and ranked between the same type of damage or between different types of damage. For example, for abrasions with a depth of 0.1 mm and a depth of 0.9 mm, it is impossible to distinguish the damage degree, treatment priority, and treatment strategy from the damage status.

[0005] (2) It is unable to solve the problem of assessing the damage status of rails when multiple types of damage coexist. For example, when there is already one type of damage on a section of rail and another type of damage that is not as serious as a minor damage appears, the existing "minor and serious damage" method cannot correctly judge the damage status of the rails in the case of multiple minor damages, which may result in underestimation of the damage status of the rails, posing a great hidden danger. In particular, in recent years, with the increase in operating intensity, the dynamic loads and fatigue stresses borne by the rails of some lines have increased significantly, the risk of damage has intensified, and the probability of two or even multiple types of damage occurring simultaneously on the same section of rails has been on the rise.

[0006] Therefore, the existing rail damage detection methods lack quantitative evaluation methods and are unable to evaluate the coexistence of multiple damages. How to scientifically and quantitatively evaluate the damage status of the rails, propose an evaluation method for the coexistence of multiple damages, and guide the adoption of targeted maintenance measures based on the evaluation results to effectively prevent and slow down the development of rail damage is a technical problem that needs to be solved urgently. Summary of the Invention

[0007] In view of the above problems in the prior art, the present application provides a method and device for evaluating rail damage, which can scientifically quantify the evaluation of the rail damage state, propose an evaluation method for coexistence of multiple damages, and guide the adoption of targeted maintenance means based on the evaluation results, so as to effectively prevent and slow down the development of rail damage and extend the service life of the rail.

[0008] To achieve the above object, the first aspect of the present application provides a method for evaluating rail damage, including: Segment the rail to be detected by unit length; Collect measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within a rail segment; Calculate the unavailability probability of each independent damage according to the measurement parameters; Obtain the rail availability probability of the rail segment through the unavailability probabilities of the independent damages; Substitute the rail availability probability into the corresponding comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the degree of rail damage of the rail segment.

[0009] From the above, by calculating the probability that multiple independent single damages within a rail segment reach the unavailability standard, the availability probability of the evaluated rail segment can be scientifically deduced using statistical probability; by scaling the value range of the availability probability into the corresponding score system and adjusting the score weights of various damages, the rail can be comprehensively evaluated and scored, which is a quantitative evaluation method and can improve the maintenance efficiency in combination with various automated system management methods; in addition, since the quantitative method is based on statistical science, more accurate maintenance suggestions can be provided for the evaluation of damages, especially in the case of coexistence of multiple damages.

[0010] As a possible implementation manner of the first aspect, the unavailability probability of one of the multiple independent damages is calculated according to the following formula:

[0011] where is the rectification probability of the damage, is the measurement parameter of the damage, is the standard parameter of the damage; is the adjustment coefficient.

[0012] From the above, by calculating the ratio between the measurement parameter and the standard parameter in the existing standards, specifications or documents, the development degree of the damage is judged. For those that have exceeded the threshold specified by the existing standard parameters, the unavailability probability of the damage is regarded as 1, that is, the rail segment has a damage that makes it unavailable. Through the adjustment coefficient, the scoring weight of this type of damage is adjusted in combination with the actual scoring requirements.

[0013] As a possible implementation of the first aspect, the unavailability probability of one of the multiple mutually independent damages is calculated according to the following formula: .

[0014] Therefore, for the case where such damages are found and the rail is unavailable, a calculation method with values only 0 or 1 is adopted.

[0015] As a possible implementation of the first aspect, the mutually independent damages include at least one of the following: abrasion, spalling, fish scale pattern, corrugation, edge crush, rail depression, vertical wear, side wear, deformation, rail crack, weld depression, rail corrosion.

[0016] Therefore, various common damages are evaluated and scored to improve the maintenance effect of the rail.

[0017] As a possible implementation of the first aspect, the unavailability probability of the spalling is calculated according to the following formula:

[0018] where are respectively the probabilities that the length and depth of the spalling reach the severe damage standard, are respectively the length and depth measurement parameters of the spalling, are respectively the minimum length and minimum depth when the spalling reaches the severe damage standard; The unavailability probability of the rail corrosion is calculated according to the following formula:

[0019]

[0020]

[0021] where are respectively the probabilities that the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail corrosion reach the severe damage standard, are respectively the change amounts of the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail due to corrosion, are respectively the change amounts when the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail due to corrosion are reduced to the severe damage standard, are respectively the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail at the initial service, are respectively the measured web thickness and bottom thickness of the rail, are respectively the thicknesses when the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail due to corrosion are reduced to the severe damage standard.

[0022] From the above, the unavailability probability of this type of damage is directly or indirectly derived by calculating the probabilities of spalling and rail corrosion reaching the critical damage standard, and the average contribution of different parameters to the same damage is calculated.

[0023] As a possible implementation of the first aspect, the comprehensive evaluation model includes:

[0024] wherein, scores the damage state of the rail section, and is used to represent the degree of rail damage; is the upper control line of the evaluation score, ; is the scoring line control coefficient, ; is the rail availability probability of the rail section, and is calculated according to the following formula:

[0025] wherein, is the unavailability probability of one of the multiple mutually independent damages.

[0026] From the above, the availability probability of the rail section is obtained by calculating the product of the availability probabilities of the mutually independent damages, and is scaled according to the percentage model to obtain the rail damage evaluation model.

[0027] As a possible implementation of the first aspect, maintenance suggestions for the rail section are provided according to the evaluation results; The maintenance suggestions include at least one of the following: no treatment, grinding or milling, milling, rail replacement.

[0028] From the above, by providing corresponding maintenance suggestions for different evaluation results, the scoring system for multiple damages can be connected to the maintenance strategy, providing a possibility for further improvement to an automated maintenance system in the future.

[0029] The second aspect of the present application provides a method for rail maintenance, including the following steps: Divide a rail to be detected into multiple rail sections, each of the rail sections having a unit length; Collect measurement parameters of multiple mutually independent damages within each of the rail sections; Calculate the unavailability probability of each of the mutually independent damages according to the measurement parameters; obtain the rail availability probability of the rail section through the unavailability probabilities of the mutually independent damages; substitute the rail availability probability into the corresponding comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the degree of rail damage of the rail section; Based on the results of the evaluation of the multiple rail segments, comprehensively evaluate the rail and provide maintenance suggestions for the rail; Obtain and locate the geographical location corresponding to the rail segment according to the continuous equidistant sampling method, and generate a prompt message in combination with the maintenance suggestions and send it to the maintenance personnel.

[0030] The third aspect of the present application provides a device for evaluating rail damage, including: A data acquisition module for collecting measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within a rail segment; A first calculation module for calculating the unavailability probability of each independent damage according to the measurement parameters; A second calculation module for obtaining the rail availability probability of the rail segment through the unavailability probabilities of the independent damages; A damage evaluation module for substituting the rail availability probability into a corresponding comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the degree of rail damage of the rail segment.

[0031] The fourth aspect of the present application provides a computing device, including: a processor, and a memory storing program instructions thereon, and when the program instructions are executed by the processor, the processor executes the method for evaluating rail damage according to any one of the first aspect, or executes the method for maintaining rail damage according to any one of the second aspect. Description of the Drawings

[0032] Figure 1 is a flowchart of the method for evaluating rail damage provided by the first embodiment of the present application; Figure 2 is a flowchart of the method for evaluating rail damage provided by the second embodiment of the present application; Figure 3 is a schematic diagram of the damage distribution and damage state scoring of non-overlapping rail segments provided by the second embodiment of the present application; Figure 4 is a schematic diagram of the damage distribution and damage state scoring of adjacent overlapping rail segments provided by the second embodiment of the present application; Figure 5 is a diagram of the grading and maintenance strategy of the rail damage state score provided by the second embodiment of the present application; Figure 6 is a schematic diagram of the device for evaluating rail damage provided by the embodiment of the present application; Figure 7 is a structural schematic diagram of a computing device provided by the embodiment of the present application.

[0033] It should be understood that in the above structural schematic diagram, the sizes and shapes of the respective block diagrams are for reference only and should not constitute an exclusive interpretation of the embodiments of the present invention. The relative positions and inclusion relationships between the respective block diagrams presented in the structural schematic diagram only schematically represent the structural associations between the block diagrams, rather than restricting the physical connection manners of the embodiments of the present invention. Detailed implementation manners

[0034] The following combines the accompanying drawings and presents embodiments to further illustrate the technical solutions provided by the present application. It should be understood that the system structures and service scenarios provided in the embodiments of the present application are mainly for illustrating possible implementation manners of the technical solutions of the present application and should not be construed as the sole limitation of the technical solutions of the present application. Those of ordinary skill in the art will know that with the evolution of system structures and the emergence of new service scenarios, the technical solutions provided by the present application are equally applicable to similar technical problems.

[0035] It should be understood that the solutions for evaluating rail damage provided in the embodiments of the present application include methods, devices, computing devices for evaluating rail damage, and methods and computing devices for maintaining rail damage. Since the principles of these technical solutions for solving problems are the same or similar, in the following introduction of specific embodiments, some repetitions may not be elaborated again, but it should be regarded that there are mutual references between these specific embodiments and they can be combined with each other.

[0036] Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by those of ordinary skill in the technical field to which this application belongs. In case of inconsistency, the meaning described in this specification or the meaning derived from the content recorded in this specification shall prevail. In addition, the terms used herein are only for the purpose of describing the embodiments of this application and are not intended to limit this application.

[0037] The rail damage assessment solution provided in the embodiments of the present application can obtain the rail availability probability of the rail section by collecting measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within the rail section and calculating the unavailability probability of each independent damage; substituting the availability probability into the corresponding comprehensive assessment model to evaluate the degree of rail damage of the rail section. This method can scientifically and quantitatively evaluate the damage state of the rail, propose assessment methods for the coexistence of multiple damages, and guide the adoption of targeted maintenance measures based on the assessment results to effectively prevent and slow down the development of rail damage and extend the service life of the rail. The embodiments of the present application can be applied to scenarios such as maintenance and repair, daily inspection, and fault troubleshooting of various railway track rails. The following will introduce each embodiment of the present application in detail with reference to the respective drawings.

[0038] The first embodiment of the present application provides a method for evaluating rail damage. The following will combine Figure 1 , and specifically illustrate the implementation manners of each step of this method, including steps S10 - S40.

[0039] S10: Collect measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within the rail section.

[0040] In some embodiments, the rail section is a segmented rail with a certain unit length. For example, the unit length can be 1000 mm. The segmentation of the rail by unit length can include at least one of the following methods: the segments do not overlap; adjacent segments overlap.

[0041] In some embodiments, the independent damages include at least one of the following: abrasion, spalling, fish-scale pattern, corrugation, overhang, rail depression, vertical wear, side wear, deformation, rail crack, weld depression, rail corrosion.

[0042] In some embodiments, after classifying the damages within the rail section, the measurement parameters are statistically analyzed according to the types. For example, for abrasion damage, measure the abrasion depth; for spalling damage, measure the length and depth of the damage; for fish-scale pattern damage, measure the length and width or area; for corrugation damage, measure the valley depth; for overhang damage, measure the thickness; for rail depression damage, measure the degree of loss; for vertical wear damage, measure the vertical wear depth; for side wear damage, measure the side wear depth; for deformation damage and rail crack damage, observe or measure whether they exist; for weld depression damage, measure the depth; for rail corrosion damage, measure the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail. The measurement tools for damages can include rail profile gauges, rail wear gauges, ultrasonic detectors, track geometry measurement systems, visual inspection systems, etc.; the measurement methods for damages can refer to relevant specifications or documents for standardized measurement.

[0043] In some embodiments, there is a certain distance between damages , when is greater than the threshold value, they can be regarded as independent damages. In necessary cases, measure the distance between damages on the rail with the help of measuring instruments that can detect damages such as internal cracks of the rail.

[0044] S20: Calculate the unavailability probability of each independent damage according to the measurement parameters.

[0045] In some embodiments, the unavailability probability of one of the multiple independent damages is calculated according to the following formula:

[0046]

[0047] where is the rectification probability of the damage, is the measurement parameter of the damage, is the standard parameter of the damage; is the adjustment coefficient. The damage using such an unavailable probability calculation method can be one of abrasion, fish scale pattern, wave wear, burr, rail depression, vertical wear, side wear, weld depression, etc.

[0048] In some embodiments, the unavailable probability of one of the multiple independent damages is calculated according to the following formula:

[0049]

[0050] wherein, the damage using such an unavailable probability calculation method can be one of deformation, rail crack, etc.

[0051] In some embodiments, the unavailable probability of the spalling is calculated according to the following formula:

[0052]

[0053]

[0054] wherein, are respectively the probabilities that the length and depth of the spalling reach the severe damage standard, are respectively the length and depth measurement parameters of the spalling, are respectively the minimum length and minimum depth when the spalling reaches the severe damage standard;

[0055] The unavailable probability of the rail corrosion is calculated according to the following formula:

[0056]

[0057]

[0058] wherein, are respectively the probabilities that the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail corrosion reach the severe damage standard, are respectively the change amounts of the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail due to corrosion, are respectively the change amounts when the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail due to corrosion are reduced to the severe damage standard, are respectively the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail at the initial service, are respectively the measured web thickness and bottom thickness of the rail, are respectively the thicknesses when the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail due to corrosion are reduced to the severe damage standard.

[0059] In some embodiments, the multiple independent damages have multiple measurement parameters, and the probability of unavailability of the i-th damage among the multiple independent damages is calculated according to the following formula:

[0060]

[0061] where is the j-th rectification probability of the i-th damage, is the j-th measurement parameter of the i-th damage, is the j-th standard parameter of the i-th damage.

[0062] S30: Obtain the rail availability probability of the rail section through the probabilities of unavailability of the independent damages.

[0063] In some embodiments, the rail availability probability of the first rail section is calculated according to the following formula:

[0064] where is the probability of unavailability of one of the multiple independent damages.

[0065] S40: Substitute the rail availability probability into the corresponding comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the degree of rail damage of the rail section.

[0066] In some embodiments, the comprehensive evaluation model includes:

[0067] where is the damage state score of the rail section, used to represent the degree of rail damage; is the upper control line of the evaluation score, ; is the scoring line control coefficient, . Among them, if the score for controlling the damage state is [60, 100], then take , , if the score for controlling the damage state is [40, 80], then take , .

[0068] In some embodiments, for an evaluation model with a score range of [0, 100], it can be equally or unequally divided into five segments, such as [0, 60], (60, 70], (70, 80], (80, 90], (90, 100]; corresponding to the classification of five types of damages, such as Grade 1 damage, Grade 2 damage, Grade 3 damage, Grade 4 damage, and Grade 5 damage. Each damage classification corresponds to one or more maintenance strategies.

[0069] In some embodiments, maintenance suggestions for the rail segment are provided according to the result of the evaluation; the maintenance suggestions include at least one of the following: no treatment, grinding or milling, milling, and rail replacement.

[0070] In some embodiments, multiple rail segments constituting a rail are monitored regularly (i.e., the above steps are used to score and evaluate the rail segments multiple times at regular intervals); the geographical location corresponding to the rail segment is obtained and located according to the method of continuous equidistant sampling. Optionally, the problem rail section is located; prompt information is generated in combination with the maintenance suggestions and sent to the maintenance personnel, and the prompt information may include at least one of the following: the last maintenance date, the scheduled maintenance date, the maintenance suggestion, and the maintenance method.

[0071] The second embodiment of the present application provides a method for evaluating rail damage. The following will be described with reference to Figure 2 the flowchart shown. The method provided by this second embodiment includes the following steps S200 - S240.

[0072] S200: Collect the measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within the rail segment.

[0073] On the rail line where damage occurs, along the longitudinal direction of the rail, the rail is segmented by unit length (L), for example, L = 1000 mm is taken.

[0074] The rail segmentation can be carried out in a non - overlapping manner for each segment (as shown in Figure 3 ) or in a partially overlapping manner with adjacent segments at a fixed spacing ( ) (as shown in Figure 4 ).

[0075] Detect all damages occurring on the rail of each unit length, and count their measurement parameters by type, such as the depth of abrasion damage, the length and depth of spalling damage, the valley depth of corrugation damage, etc. The specific measurement parameters are shown in Table 1.

[0076] During the collection process, it should be noted that the damage evaluation method proposed in this application is for independent damages (each damage is at a different position) (as shown in Figure 3 , 4 ). For the case where multiple damages at the same position affect each other, tools such as finite element analysis should be used to conduct specific analysis on it.

[0077] S210: Calculate the unavailability probability of each independent damage according to the measurement parameters.

[0078] Based on the obtained measurement parameter data of each damage, calculate the unavailability probability of different damages according to the unavailability probability functions of various damages in Table 1.

[0079] Table 1 Measurement of Common Rail Damages and Calculation Table of Unavailability Probability

[0080]

[0081]

[0082]

[0083]

[0084]

[0085] Note: For the definition of damage and the criteria for serious and minor damages, refer to "TG / GW 102 - 2019 Maintenance Rules for General - speed Railway Lines".

[0086] As Figure 3 、 4 shown, on a rail with a unit length of L, there are multiple damages such as spalling and chipping (A1, A2), scuffing (B1), fish - scale marks (C1), etc. Among them, the initial parameters (standard parameters) of A1 are ; the initial parameters (standard parameters) of A2 are , the initial parameters (standard parameters) of B1 are , and the initial parameters (standard parameters) of C1 are . The measurement parameters of A1 are ; the measurement parameters of A2 are , the measurement parameters of B1 are , and the measurement parameters of C1 are .

[0087] Obtained according to the calculation formula in Table 1:

[0088]

[0089]

[0090]

[0091] S220: Obtain the rail availability probability of the rail section through the unavailability probabilities of the independent damages.

[0092] The available probability of the rail section or the evaluation interval (unit length L) can be calculated by the following formula:

[0093] where, is the unavailable probability of one of the multiple mutually independent damages.

[0094] For single damages A1, A2, B1, C1, the available probabilities of the rail are 0.329, 0.5, 0.5, 0.75 respectively; assuming only combinations of C1, A2 and B1, A1 are considered, the available probabilities of the rail are 0.375 and 0.1645 respectively; if all the above four damages are considered, the available probability of the rail is 0.061.

[0095] S230: Substitute the available probability of the rail into the comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the degree of rail damage of the rail section.

[0096] Substitute the available probability of the above rail into the comprehensive evaluation model of the rail (as shown in the following formula) to obtain the rail comprehensive damage state scores as shown in Table 2.

[0097]

[0098] where, is the damage state score of the first rail section; where, Take 0.6.

[0099] It can be seen from Table 2 that when there is already one type of damage on the rail, if a new damage appears, the rail damage state score will continue to decrease, meaning that the rail damage condition deteriorates further. On the contrary, when there are multiple damages on the rail, if some damages are eliminated through maintenance, the rail damage condition will improve and the rail damage state score will increase.

[0100] Table 2 Example table for calculating rail damage state scores

[0101]

[0102] In addition, referring to the standard parameter values of common single damages in the "severe and minor damages" method, as well as the recommended adjustment coefficients and score ranges are shown in Table 3. It can be seen from Table 3 that the common damages with a score range of (90, 100] do not meet the rectification requirements, while the common damages with a score range of (80, 90] do not meet the minor damage standard, the common damages with a score range of (60, 80] meet the traditional minor damage standard, and the common damages with a score less than 60 points constitute severe damages.

[0103] Therefore, when calculating the damage, if the value of a is set to 0.6, when there is no damage reaching the severe damage standard in Table 1 within the evaluated interval, the range of the final score is (60, 100]; and for those that have reached the severe damage standard, since the value is 0, the final score is 60, meaning that rail replacement is required.

[0104] Table 3 Value range of the scores for the rail damage status when common single damages occur

[0105]

[0106] S240: Provide maintenance suggestions for the rail according to the evaluation results.

[0107] For the convenience of quickly grasping the rail damage situation, the rail damage status is segmented and the damage is classified according to the scoring values of the rail damage status as shown in Figure 5 the figure. Combining the severe and minor damage standards of various damages in the "severe and minor damage" method and Table 3, it can be seen that level 5 damage is the damage that only needs attention, level 2 - 4 damages include all minor damages and the damages to be rectified, and level 1 damages include all severe damages.

[0108] From the above analysis, it can be seen that the damage status score and the damage level intuitively reflect the degree of rail damage, laying a foundation for formulating targeted maintenance strategies. Combining the actual maintenance operation experience, according to the rail damage status score and the damage classification, the following maintenance strategies can be formulated (see Figure 5 ): (1) When the rail damage status is level 5 damage (that is, when the rail score is above 90), the rail only needs to be monitored and no treatment is required; (2) When the rail damage status is level 4 damage (that is, when the rail score is between 80 and 90, including 90), the rail needs to be ground or milled; (3) When the rail damage status is level 3 or level 2 damage (that is, when the rail score is between 60 and 80, including 80), the rail needs to be milled; (4) When the rail damage status is level 1 damage (that is, when the rail score is 60 or below), rail replacement is required.

[0109] According to the rail status scoring results given in Table 2, referring to Figure 5From the damage grading and maintenance suggestions, it can be known that for single damages A1, A2, B1, and C1, the damage grades of the rail are level three, level three, level three, and level four respectively; the corresponding maintenance suggestions are milling, milling, milling and grinding or milling respectively. Assuming only combinations of C1 and A2, and B1 and A1 are considered, the damage grades of the rail are level three and level two respectively; the corresponding maintenance suggestions are grinding or milling and milling respectively. If all four damages above are considered, the damage grade of the rail is level two; the corresponding maintenance suggestion is milling.

[0110] In practical applications, after being combined with a rail detection vehicle, the above scoring and evaluation method can be used to quickly and automatically evaluate the overall and local damage states of the rail after damage detection. After one evaluation is completed, the rail can be monitored regularly. When new damages occur, after determining their measurement parameters and unavailability probabilities, the damage state of the rail can be scored and quantified. Thus, a short-term time series record of the rail per unit length can be retained, facilitating further management and maintenance, scientific research, and fault location of the overall line system and the vehicle itself.

[0111] The third embodiment of this application provides a device for rail damage assessment, which can be used to implement the method for rail damage assessment in the above embodiments, such as Figure 6 shown. The device for rail damage assessment includes: A data acquisition module, which is used to acquire the measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within the rail evaluation interval; specifically, this data acquisition module can be used to implement step S10 and its optional embodiments in the first embodiment.

[0112] A first calculation module, which is used to calculate the unavailability probability of each independent damage according to the measurement parameters; specifically, this first calculation module can be used to implement step S20 and its optional embodiments in the first embodiment.

[0113] A second calculation module, which is used to obtain the rail availability probability of the rail section through the unavailability probabilities of the independent damages; specifically, this second calculation module can be used to implement step S30 and its optional embodiments in the first embodiment.

[0114] A damage assessment module, which is used to substitute the rail availability probability into the corresponding comprehensive evaluation model for evaluation; specifically, this damage assessment module can be used to implement step S40 and its optional embodiments in the first embodiment.

[0115] Figure 7 It is a structural schematic diagram of a computing device 700 provided by an embodiment of this application. This computing device can execute the optional embodiments in the above method. This computing device can be a terminal, or a chip or chip system inside the terminal. Such as Figure 7As shown, the computing device 700 includes: a processor 710, a memory 720, and a communication interface 730.

[0116] It should be understood that Figure 7 the communication interface 730 in the computing device 700 shown can be used to communicate with other devices, and specifically can include one or more transceiver circuits or interface circuits.

[0117] Among them, the processor 710 can be connected to the memory 720. The memory 720 can be used to store the program code and data. Therefore, the memory 720 can be an internal storage unit of the processor 710, an external storage unit independent of the processor 710, or a component including an internal storage unit of the processor 710 and an external storage unit independent of the processor 710.

[0118] Optionally, the computing device 700 can further include a bus. Among them, the memory 720 and the communication interface 730 can be connected to the processor 710 through the bus. The bus can be a Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI) bus or an Extended Industry Standard Architecture (EISA) bus, etc. The bus can be divided into an address bus, a data bus, a control bus, etc. For ease of representation, Figure 7 a line without an arrow is used in the figure, but it does not mean that there is only one bus or one type of bus.

[0119] It should be understood that in the embodiments of the present application, the processor 710 can adopt a central processing unit (CPU). The processor can also be other general-purpose processors, digital signal processors (DSPs), application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), or other programmable logic devices, discrete gate or transistor logic devices, discrete hardware components, etc. The general-purpose processor can be a microprocessor or the processor can also be any conventional processor, etc. Or the processor 710 adopts one or more integrated circuits to execute relevant programs to implement the technical solutions provided by the embodiments of the present application.

[0120] The memory 720 may include a read-only memory and a random access memory, and provide instructions and data to the processor 710. A part of the processor 710 may also include a non-volatile random access memory. For example, the processor 710 may also store information about the device type.

[0121] When the computing device 700 is running, the processor 710 executes the computer-executable instructions in the memory 720 to perform any operation step of the above method and any optional embodiment thereof.

[0122] It should be understood that the computing device 700 according to the embodiments of the present application may correspond to the corresponding subject executing the methods according to the embodiments of the present application, and the above and other operations and / or functions of each module in the computing device 700 respectively implement the corresponding processes of the methods of each embodiment. For the sake of brevity, they will not be described in detail here.

[0123] Those of ordinary skill in the art can realize that the units and algorithm steps of the examples described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented by electronic hardware, or a combination of computer software and electronic hardware. Whether these functions are executed in a hardware or software manner depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Professionals can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementation should not be considered to exceed the scope of the present application.

[0124] Those skilled in the art can clearly understand that for the convenience and brevity of description, the specific working processes of the systems, devices, and units described above can refer to the corresponding processes in the foregoing method embodiments, and will not be described in detail here.

[0125] In several embodiments provided by the present application, it should be understood that the disclosed systems, devices, and methods can be implemented in other ways. For example, the device embodiments described above are merely illustrative. For example, the division of the units is only a logical function division. In actual implementation, there may be other division methods. For example, multiple units or components can be combined or integrated into another system, or some features can be ignored or not executed. Another point is that the displayed or discussed couplings or direct couplings or communication connections to each other can be through some interfaces. The indirect couplings or communication connections of the devices or units can be in electrical, mechanical, or other forms.

[0126] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separated, and the components displayed as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they can be located in one place, or distributed to multiple network units. Some or all of the units can be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the solution of this embodiment.

[0127] In addition, in each embodiment of the present application, each functional unit may be integrated into one processing unit, may exist separately physically for each unit, or two or more units may be integrated into one unit.

[0128] If the above functions are implemented in the form of software functional units and sold or used as independent products, they can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on such understanding, the technical solution of the present application, in essence, or the part that contributes to the prior art, or a part of this 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 for causing a computer device (which may be a personal computer, a server, or a network device, etc.) to execute all or part of the steps of the methods described in each embodiment of the present application. The foregoing storage medium includes: various media such as USB flash drives, mobile hard disks, read-only memories (ROMs), random access memories (RAMs), magnetic disks, or optical discs that can store program codes.

[0129] The embodiments of the present application also provide a computer-readable storage medium, on which a computer program is stored, and when the program is executed by a processor, it is used to execute the above method, and the method includes at least one of the solutions described in the above various embodiments.

[0130] The computer storage medium of the embodiments of the present application may adopt any combination of one or more computer-readable media. The computer-readable medium may be a computer-readable signal medium or a computer-readable storage medium. The computer-readable storage medium may be, for example, but not limited to, an electrical, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, or device, or any combination of the above. More specific examples (non-exhaustive list) of the computer-readable storage medium include: an electrical connection having one or more wires, a portable computer disk, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or flash memory), an optical fiber, a portable compact disk read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of the above. In this document, the computer-readable storage medium may be any tangible medium that contains or stores a program, and this program can be used by or in combination with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

[0131] A computer-readable signal medium may include a data signal propagated in a baseband or as part of a carrier wave, in which computer-readable program code is carried. Such propagated data signals may take many forms, including but not limited to electromagnetic signals, optical signals, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. The computer-readable signal medium may also be any computer-readable medium other than a computer-readable storage medium, which can send, propagate, or transmit a program for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

[0132] The program code contained on a computer-readable medium may be transmitted using any appropriate medium, including but not limited to wireless, wire, optical fiber cable, RF, etc., or any suitable combination of the foregoing.

[0133] The computer program code for performing the operations of this application may be written in one or more programming languages or combinations thereof. The programming languages include object-oriented programming languages such as Java, Smalltalk, C++, and also include conventional procedural programming languages such as the "C" language or similar programming languages. The program code may be executed entirely on the user's computer, partially on the user's computer, executed as a stand-alone software package, partially on the user's computer and partially on a remote computer, or entirely on a remote computer or server. In the case of a remote computer, the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through any type of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or may be connected to an external computer (e.g., through the Internet using an Internet service provider).

[0134] In addition, the terms "first," "second," "third," etc. or terms such as module A, module B, module C, etc. in the description and claims are only used to distinguish similar objects and do not represent a specific order for the objects. Understandably, the specific order or sequence may be interchanged where permitted so that the embodiments of this application described herein can be implemented in an order other than that illustrated or described herein.

[0135] In the above description, the reference numerals representing steps, such as S110, S120, etc., do not necessarily indicate that the steps will be executed in this order. The order of the steps before and after may be interchanged where permitted, or the steps may be executed simultaneously.

[0136] The term "comprising" as used in the specification and claims should not be construed as limited to the content listed thereafter; it does not exclude other elements or steps. Thus, it should be interpreted as specifying the presence of the stated features, integers, steps or components, but not excluding the presence or addition of one or more other features, integers, steps or components and groups thereof. Thus, the expression "a device comprising devices A and B" should not be limited to a device consisting only of components A and B.

[0137] As used herein, the phrase "in one embodiment" or "in an embodiment" means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristic described in connection with the embodiment is included in at least one embodiment of the present application. Thus, the phrases "in one embodiment" or "in an embodiment" that appear throughout this specification are not necessarily all referring to the same embodiment, but may refer to the same embodiment. Additionally, in one or more embodiments, the various specific features, structures, or characteristics may be combined in any suitable manner, as will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art from the present disclosure.

[0138] Note that the above are only the preferred embodiments of the present application and the technical principles applied. Those skilled in the art will understand that the present application is not limited to the specific embodiments described herein, and various obvious changes, re-adjustments, and substitutions can be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the scope of protection of the present application. Therefore, although the present application has been described in detail through the above embodiments, the present application is not limited to the above embodiments, and without departing from the concept of the present application, more other equivalent embodiments may be included, all of which fall within the scope of protection of the present application.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating rail damage, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: The rail to be inspected is divided into sections according to unit length; the measurement parameters of multiple independent damages in a rail section are collected; Calculating the unavailability probability of each independent damage according to the measurement parameters; Obtaining the rail availability probability of the rail segment through the unavailability probabilities of the independent damages; Substituting the available probability of the rail into the corresponding comprehensive evaluation model, the damage degree of the rail segment is evaluated.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The probability of unavailability of one of the multiple independent impairments Calculated according to the following formula: ； ； in, is the probability of remediation of the damage, is the measurement parameter of the damage, is the standard parameter of the injury; is the adjustment coefficient.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The probability of unavailability of one of the multiple independent impairments Calculated according to the following formula: 。 4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The independent damages include at least one of the following: abrasions, flaking, fish scales, wave wear, fat edges, rail head droop, vertical wear, side wear, deformation, rail cracks, weld depressions, and rail rust.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that The unavailability probability of the peeled off block Calculated according to the following formula: ； ； ； in, are the probabilities that the length and depth of the peeled-off block reach the serious injury standard, are the length and depth measurement parameters of the peeled-off block, respectively, are respectively the minimum length and minimum depth when the peeling off reaches the serious injury standard; The probability of unavailability of the rail due to corrosion Calculated according to the following formula: ； in are the probabilities that the thickness of the corroded rail waist and rail bottom of the rail reaches the serious damage standard, are the changes in the rail waist thickness and rail bottom thickness due to corrosion, are the changes in the thickness of the rail waist and rail bottom due to corrosion when they are reduced to the severe damage standard, are the rail waist thickness and rail bottom thickness of the rail when it is initially put into service, are the measured waist thickness and bottom thickness of the rail, They are respectively the thickness of the rail when the thickness of the rail waist and the thickness of the rail bottom are reduced to the severe damage standard due to corrosion.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The comprehensive assessment model includes: ； in, Scoring the damage state of the rail segment to indicate the degree of rail damage; To set the upper control line for the evaluation score, ; is the scoring control coefficient, ; is the probability of rail availability of the rail segment, calculated according to the following formula: ； in, is the unavailability probability of one of the multiple independent damages.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Also includes: providing maintenance recommendations for the rail segment based on the results of the evaluation; The maintenance suggestion includes at least one of the following: no treatment required, grinding or milling, milling, and rail replacement.

8. A method for rail maintenance, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: Dividing a steel rail to be inspected into a plurality of steel rail segments, each of the steel rail segments having a unit length; Collecting measurement parameters of multiple independent damages in each rail segment; Calculating the unavailability probability of each independent damage according to the measurement parameters; obtaining the rail availability probability of the rail segment through the independent damage unavailability probability; substituting the rail availability probability into the corresponding comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the damage degree of the rail segment; Performing a comprehensive evaluation on the rails according to the evaluation results of the plurality of rail segments, and providing maintenance suggestions for the rails; The geographical location corresponding to the rail segment is obtained and located in a continuous equidistant sampling manner, and a prompt message is generated in combination with the maintenance suggestion and sent to the maintenance personnel.

9. A rail damage assessment device, characterized in that: include: Data acquisition module, used to collect measurement parameters of multiple independent damages in the rail section; A first calculation module, used for calculating the unavailability probability of each independent damage according to the measurement parameters; A second calculation module is used to obtain the rail availability probability of the rail segment according to the unavailability probabilities of the independent damages; The damage assessment module is used to substitute the available probability of the rail into the corresponding comprehensive assessment model to assess the damage degree of the rail segment.

10. A computing device, characterized in that include: processor, and A memory having program instructions stored thereon, wherein when the program instructions are executed by the processor, the processor executes the method for assessing rail damage according to any one of claims 1 to 7, or executes the method for maintaining rails according to claim 8.

Images