A method and device for evaluating rail damage

Abstract

The present application provides a method and device for evaluating rail damage. The method includes the following steps: segmenting the rail to be detected by unit length; collecting measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within a 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 unavailability probabilities of the independent damages; substituting the rail availability probability into a corresponding comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the degree of rail damage of the rail segment. The present application also provides a corresponding device for evaluating rail damage. The present application can scientifically and quantitatively evaluate the damage state of the rail, propose an evaluation method for coexistence of multiple damages, and guide the adoption of targeted maintenance measures 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.

Description

Technical Field

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

[0002] Rail damage is an issue that cannot be ignored in railway transportation. There are various types of rail damage with complex causes, and common ones include fish-scale marks, spalling, corrugation, abrasion, overhang, vertical wear, side wear, etc. These damages not only affect the riding comfort, reduce the service life of the rails, but also pose a major threat to train operation safety.

[0003] Currently, the "minor and major damage" method is mainly used in the industry to evaluate and maintain the damage state of rails. Taking urban rail transit with a speed less than 120 km / h as an example, when abrasion occurs on the rail, if the abrasion depth exceeds 1 mm, the rail damage is minor damage; if the abrasion depth exceeds 2 mm, the rail damage is major damage. Abrasions close to or reaching minor damage can be repaired by grinding or milling the rail, and if the abrasion reaches the major damage standard, the rail needs to be replaced in time. The "minor and major damage" method is applicable to the evaluation of most common rail damages.

[0004] The existing methods have the following problems:

[0005] (1) The quantification of damage state scores cannot be achieved. For a specific type of damage, the "minor and major damage" method simply divides the damage degree into three segments: less than minor damage, minor damage, and major damage, and the damage degrees within the segment are the same without distinction. Since the score quantification is not achieved, within the same segmented range, the rail damage states between the same type of damage or different types of damage cannot be compared and ranked. For example, for abrasions with depths of 0.1 mm and 0.9 mm, it is impossible to distinguish the damage degree, treatment priority, and treatment strategy from the damage state.

[0006] (2) It is impossible to solve the evaluation of the rail damage state when multiple damages coexist. For example, when there is already one damage on a section of rail and then another damage less than minor damage appears, the existing "minor and major damage" method cannot correctly judge the rail damage state in the case of multiple minor damages at this time, which may result in underestimating the rail damage state and pose a greater hidden danger. Especially in recent years, with the increase in operation intensity, the dynamic loads and fatigue stresses borne by the rails on some lines have increased significantly, the damage risk has intensified, and the probability of two damages or even multiple damages occurring simultaneously on the same section of rail is on the rise.

[0007] 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

[0008] In view of the above problems in the prior art, the present application provides a method and device for rail damage assessment, which can scientifically and quantitatively evaluate the damage status of the rail, propose an assessment method 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.

[0009] To achieve the above objectives, the present application provides a first aspect of a rail damage assessment method, comprising:

[0010] Divide the rail to be inspected into sections according to unit length;

[0011] Collect measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within a rail section;

[0012] Calculating the unavailability probability of each independent damage based on the measurement parameters;

[0013] Obtaining the rail availability probability of the rail segment through the unavailability probabilities of the independent damages;

[0014] The rail availability probability is substituted into a corresponding comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the damage degree of the rail segment.

[0015] From the above, by calculating the probability of multiple independent single damage points within a rail section reaching the unusable standard, the usability probability of the rails in the assessment section can be scientifically inferred using statistical probability. By scaling the value range of the usable probability to the corresponding scoring system and adjusting the score weights of various types of damage, the rails can be comprehensively evaluated and scored. This is a quantitative assessment method that can be combined with various automated system management methods to improve maintenance efficiency. In addition, because the quantitative method is based on statistical science, it can provide more accurate maintenance recommendations for damage assessment, especially when multiple damages coexist.

[0016] As a possible implementation of the first aspect, the unavailability probability of one of the multiple independent impairments is Calculate according to the following formula:

[0017]

[0018] in, is the probability of repairing the damage, is the measurement parameter of the damage is the standard parameter of the damage is the adjustment coefficient

[0019] Thus, by calculating the ratio between the measurement parameter and the standard parameter in 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 parameter, the probability of the damage being unusable is regarded as 1, that is, there is a damage that makes the rail segment unusable. Through the adjustment coefficient, the scoring weight of this type of damage is adjusted in combination with the actual scoring requirements

[0020] As a possible implementation manner of the first aspect, the probability of a certain damage among the multiple independent damages being unusable is calculated according to the following formula

[0021] .

[0022] Thus, for the situation where such damage is found and the rail is unusable, a calculation method with values only 0 or 1 is adopted

[0023] As a possible implementation manner of the first aspect, the independent damages include at least one of the following: abrasion, spalling, fish scale pattern, wave wear, overhanging edge, rail depression, vertical wear, side wear, deformation, rail crack, weld depression, rail corrosion

[0024] Thus, various common damages are evaluated and scored to improve the maintenance effect of the rail

[0025] As a possible implementation manner of the first aspect, the probability of the spalling being unusable is calculated according to the following formula

[0026]

[0027] where are respectively the probabilities that the length and depth of the spalling reach the severe damage standard are respectively the measurement parameters of the length and depth of the spalling are respectively the minimum length and minimum depth when the spalling reaches the severe damage standard

[0028] The probability of the rail corrosion being unusable is calculated according to the following formula

[0029]

[0030]

[0031]

[0032] Among them, are respectively the probabilities that the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rusted rail reach the serious injury standard, are respectively the change amounts of the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail due to rust, are respectively the change amounts when the web thickness and the bottom thickness of the rail due to rust decrease to the serious injury 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 rust decrease to the serious injury standard.

[0033] From the above, the unavailable probability of this type of damage is directly or indirectly derived by calculating the probabilities of spalling and the rail rust reaching the serious injury standard, and the average contributions of different parameters to the same damage are calculated.

[0034] As a possible implementation manner of the first aspect, the comprehensive evaluation model includes:

[0035]

[0036] Among them, 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, ; is the available probability of the rail section, calculated according to the following formula:

[0037]

[0038] Among them, is the unavailable probability of one of the multiple mutually independent damages.

[0039] From the above, the available probability of the rail section is obtained by calculating the product of the available probabilities of mutually independent damages, and is scaled according to the percentile model to obtain the rail damage evaluation model.

[0040] As a possible implementation manner of the first aspect, maintenance suggestions for the rail section are provided according to the evaluation results;

[0041] The maintenance suggestions include at least one of the following: no treatment, grinding or milling, milling, rail replacement.

[0042] As described above, by providing maintenance suggestions corresponding to different evaluation results, the scoring system with multiple damages can be connected to the maintenance strategy, which provides the possibility for further improvement into an automated maintenance system in the future.

[0043] The second aspect of this application provides a method for rail maintenance, including the following steps:

[0044] Divide a rail to be detected into multiple rail segments, and each of the rail segments has a unit length;

[0045] Collect the measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within each of the rail segments;

[0046] 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;

[0047] According to the evaluation results of the multiple rail segments, conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the rail and provide maintenance suggestions for the rail;

[0048] Obtain and locate the geographical location corresponding to the rail segment according to the continuous equidistant sampling method, and generate prompt information in combination with the maintenance suggestions and send it to the maintenance personnel.

[0049] The third aspect of this application provides a device for rail damage evaluation, including:

[0050] A data acquisition module for collecting the measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within a rail segment;

[0051] A first calculation module for calculating the unavailability probability of each independent damage according to the measurement parameters;

[0052] A second calculation module for obtaining the rail availability probability of the rail segment through the unavailability probabilities of the independent damages;

[0053] A damage evaluation module for substituting the rail availability probability into the corresponding comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the degree of rail damage of the rail segment.

[0054] The fourth aspect of this application provides a computing device, including: a processor and a memory, on which program instructions are stored. When the program instructions are executed by the processor, the processor executes the method for rail damage evaluation according to any one of the first aspect, or executes the method for rail damage maintenance according to any one of the second aspect. Description of the Drawings

[0055] Figure 1It is a flowchart of the method for evaluating rail damage provided by the first embodiment of the present application;

[0056] Figure 2 It is a flowchart of the method for evaluating rail damage provided by the second embodiment of the present application;

[0057] Figure 3 It is a schematic diagram of the distribution of rail damage in non - overlapping segments and the scoring of damage states provided by the second embodiment of the present application;

[0058] Figure 4 It is a schematic diagram of the distribution of rail damage in adjacent segments with overlap and the scoring of damage states provided by the second embodiment of the present application;

[0059] Figure 5 It is a diagram for grading and maintenance strategy of rail damage state scores provided by the second embodiment of the present application;

[0060] Figure 6 It is a schematic diagram of the device for evaluating rail damage provided by the embodiment of the present application;

[0061] Figure 7 It is a structural schematic diagram of a computing device provided by the embodiment of the present application.

[0062] It should be understood that in the above structural schematic diagrams, the sizes and shapes of each block diagram 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 block diagrams presented in the structural schematic diagrams only schematically represent the structural associations between the block diagrams, rather than limiting the physical connection manners of the embodiments of the present invention. Detailed implementation manners

[0063] The following takes examples in combination with the attached drawings to further illustrate the technical solutions provided by the present application. It should be understood that the system structure and business 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 interpreted as the only limitation of the technical solutions of the present application. Those of ordinary skill in the art know that with the evolution of the system structure and the emergence of new business scenarios, the technical solutions provided by the present application are equally applicable to similar technical problems.

[0064] It should be understood that the solutions for evaluating rail damage provided in the embodiments of the present application include the methods, devices, computing devices for evaluating rail damage, and the methods and computing devices for rail damage maintenance. Since the principles of these technical solutions for solving problems are the same or similar, in the following introduction of specific embodiments, some repeated parts 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.

[0065] Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by those skilled in the technical field to which this application belongs. In case of inconsistency, the meaning stated 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.

[0066] The rail damage assessment scheme provided by the embodiments of this application can obtain the rail availability probability of the rail segment by collecting the measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within the rail segment and calculating the unavailability probability of each independent damage; substitute the availability probability into the corresponding comprehensive assessment model to evaluate the degree of rail damage of the rail segment. This method can scientifically and quantitatively evaluate the damage state of the rail, propose an assessment method 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 this application can be applied to scenarios such as the maintenance, daily inspection, and fault troubleshooting of various railway track rails. The following will introduce each embodiment of this application in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0067] The first embodiment of this application provides a rail damage assessment method, which will be combined with Figure 1 , and specifically illustrate the implementation manners of each step of this method, including steps S10 - S40.

[0068] S10: Collect the measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within the rail segment.

[0069] In some embodiments, the rail segment is a rail section with a certain unit length. For example, the unit length can be 1000 mm. The rail can be segmented by unit length in at least one of the following ways: each segment does not overlap; adjacent segments overlap.

[0070] In some embodiments, the independent damages include at least one of the following: abrasion, spalling, fish scale pattern, wave wear, overhang, rail depression, vertical wear, side wear, deformation, rail crack, weld depression, rail corrosion.

[0071] In some embodiments, after classifying the damages in the rail segment, the measurement parameters are statistically analyzed according to the types; for example, for abrasion damages, the abrasion depth is measured; for spalling damages, the length and depth of the damages are measured; for fish-scale damages, the length and width or area are measured; for wave wear damages, the valley depth is measured; for overhanging damages, the thickness is measured; for rail depression damages, the loss of degree is measured; for vertical wear damages, the vertical wear depth is measured; for side wear damages, the side wear depth is measured; for deformation damages and rail crack damages, it is observed or measured whether they exist; for weld depression damages, the depth is measured; for rail corrosion damages, the rail web thickness and the rail base thickness are measured. The measuring tools for damages can include rail profilometers, rail wear gauges, ultrasonic detectors, track geometry measurement systems, visual inspection systems, etc.; the measuring methods for damages can refer to relevant specifications or documents for standardized measurement.

[0072] In some embodiments, there is a certain distance between damages , when is greater than the threshold, they can be regarded as independent damages. In necessary cases, a measuring instrument capable of detecting damages such as internal cracks in the rail is used to determine the damage spacing distance of the rail.

[0073] S20: Calculate the inoperability probability of each independent damage according to the measurement parameters.

[0074] In some embodiments, the inoperability probability of one type of damage among the multiple independent damages is calculated according to the following formula:

[0075]

[0076]

[0077] 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 damages using such inoperability probability calculation methods can be one of abrasion, fish-scale, wave wear, overhanging, rail depression, vertical wear, side wear, weld depression, etc.

[0078] In some embodiments, the inoperability probability of one type of damage among the multiple independent damages is calculated according to the following formula:

[0079]

[0080] where, the damages using such inoperability probability calculation methods can be one of deformation, rail crack, etc.

[0081] In some embodiments, the unavailability probability of the peeled block is Calculate according to the following formula:

[0082]

[0083]

[0084]

[0085] in, are the probabilities that the length and depth of the peeling block reach the serious injury standard, are the length and depth measurement parameters of the peeled-off block, are respectively the minimum length and minimum depth when the spalling fragments reach the serious injury standard;

[0086] The unusable probability of the rail being corroded Calculate according to the following formula:

[0087]

[0088]

[0089]

[0090] 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 rail waist thickness and rail bottom thickness when the rail is reduced to the serious damage standard due to corrosion, are the rail waist thickness and rail bottom thickness of the rail when it is first put into service, are the measured rail waist thickness and rail bottom thickness of the rail, are the thickness of the rail when the rail waist thickness and rail bottom thickness are reduced to the severe damage standard due to corrosion.

[0091] In some embodiments, the plurality of independent impairments have a plurality of measurement parameters, and the unavailability probability of the i-th impairment among the plurality of independent impairments is Calculate according to the following formula:

[0092]

[0093]

[0094] in, is the probability of remediation of the jth damage at the i-th location, is the jth measured parameter of the damage at the i-th location, is the jth standard parameter of the damage at the i-th location.

[0095] S30: Obtain the rail availability probability of the rail segment according to the unavailability probabilities of the independent damages.

[0096] In some embodiments, the rail availability probability of the first rail segment is calculated according to the following formula:

[0097]

[0098] in, is the unavailability probability of one of the multiple independent damages.

[0099] S40: Substituting the rail availability probability into a corresponding comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the damage degree of the rail segment.

[0100] In some embodiments, the comprehensive assessment model includes:

[0101]

[0102] in, Scoring the damage state of the rail segment to indicate the degree of rail damage; To set the upper control line for the assessment score, ; is the scoring control coefficient, Among them, if the score of the control damage state is [60,100], then take , , if the control damage state score is [40,80], then take , .

[0103] In some embodiments, an evaluation model with a score range of [0, 100] can be equally or unequally divided into five segments, such as [0, 60], (60, 70], (70, 80], (80, 90], (90, 100]; corresponding to five damage ratings, such as level 1 damage, level 2 damage, level 3 damage, level 4 damage, and level 5 damage. Each damage rating corresponds to one or more maintenance strategies.

[0104] In some embodiments, maintenance recommendations for the rail segment are provided based on the evaluation results; the maintenance recommendations include at least one of the following: no treatment required, grinding or milling, milling, or rail replacement.

[0105] In some embodiments, multiple rail segments constituting a rail are regularly monitored (i.e., the rail segments are scored and evaluated multiple times at regular intervals using the above steps); the geographical locations corresponding to the rail segments are obtained and located according to a continuous equidistant sampling method. Optionally, the problem rail section is located; prompt information is generated in combination with maintenance suggestions and sent to maintenance personnel. The prompt information may include at least one of the following: the last maintenance date, the scheduled maintenance date, maintenance suggestions, and maintenance methods.

[0106] 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.

[0107] S200: Collect measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within a rail segment.

[0108] On the rail line where damage occurs, along the longitudinal direction of the rail, the rail is segmented by unit length (L), for example, taking L = 1000 mm.

[0109] The rail segmentation can be carried out in a non - overlapping manner for each segment (as Figure 3 shown) or in a partially overlapping manner with adjacent segments at a fixed spacing ( ) (as Figure 4 shown).

[0110] Detect all damages occurring on each unit - length rail, and statistically 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.

[0111] During the collection process, it should be noted that the rail damage evaluation method proposed in this application targets independent (damages at different locations) damages (as Figure 3 , 4 shown). For the case where multiple damages at the same location affect each other, tools such as finite - element analysis should be used to conduct specific analysis on it.

[0112] S210: Calculate the unavailability probability of each independent damage based on the measurement parameters.

[0113] Based on the data of the measurement parameters of each damage, calculate the unavailability probability of different damages according to the unavailability probability functions of various damages in Table 1.

[0114] Table 1 Rail common damage parameter measurement and unavailability probability calculation table

[0115]

[0116]

[0117]

[0118]

[0119]

[0120] Note: For the definition of damage and the criteria for minor and serious injuries, refer to the "Rules for Maintenance of General-Speed Railway Lines TG / GW 102-2019".

[0121] 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), abrasion (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 measured parameters of A1 are ; the measured parameters of A2 are , the measured parameters of B1 are , and the measured parameters of C1 are .

[0122] Obtained according to the calculation formula in Table 1:

[0123]

[0124]

[0125]

[0126]

[0127] S220: Obtain the available probability of the rail section through the unavailable probabilities of the mutually independent damages.

[0128] The available probability of the rail section or the evaluation interval (unit length L) can be calculated by the following formula:

[0129]

[0130] where is the unavailable probability of one of the multiple mutually independent damages.

[0131] 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 and A2, and B1 and A1 are considered, the available probabilities of the rail are 0.375 and 0.1645 respectively; if all four damages above are considered, the available probability of the rail is 0.061.

[0132] S230: Substitute the available probability of the rail into the comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the degree of rail damage for the rail section.

[0133] 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 comprehensive rail damage state scores shown in Table 2.

[0134]

[0135] Where, is the damage state score of the first rail section; where, Take 0.6.

[0136] It can be seen from Table 2 that when there is already one kind 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.

[0137] Table 2 Example table for calculating the rail damage state score

[0138]

[0139] In addition, referring to the standard parameter values of common single damages in the "serious and minor damages" method, as well as the adjustment coefficient and score range suggestions are shown in Table 3. It can be seen from Table 3 that common damages with a score range of (90, 100] do not reach the rectification requirements, common damages with a score range of (80, 90] do not reach the minor damage standard, common damages with a score range of (60, 80] reach the traditional minor damage standard, and common damages less than 60 points constitute serious damages.

[0140] Therefore, when calculating damages, if the value of a is set to 0.6, when there is no damage reaching the serious damage standard in Table 1 in the evaluated interval, the range of the final score is (60, 100]; and for those that have reached the serious damage standard, since the value is 0, so the final score is 60, meaning that rail replacement is required.

[0141] Table 3 Value range of the rail damage state score when common single damages appear

[0142]

[0143] S240: Providing maintenance suggestions for the rails according to the evaluation results.

[0144] In order to quickly understand the damage of the rails, the rails are divided into sections and graded according to the damage status. Figure 5 Combining the severity standards of various injuries in the "severe and mild injury" method with Table 3, we can see that grade 5 injuries are injuries that only require attention, grades 2 to 4 injuries include all minor injuries and injuries that require treatment, and grade 1 injuries include all severe injuries.

[0145] From the above analysis, we can see that the damage status score and damage level directly reflect the degree of rail damage, which lays the foundation for formulating targeted maintenance strategies. Combined with actual maintenance operation experience, according to the rail damage status score and damage classification, the following maintenance strategies can be formulated (see Figure 5 ):

[0146] (1) When the rail damage status is level 5 (i.e., the rail score is above 90), the rail only needs to be monitored and no treatment is required;

[0147] (2) When the rail damage status is level 4 (i.e. the rail score is between 80 and 90, including 90), the rail needs to be ground or milled;

[0148] (3) When the rail damage status is level 3 or level 2 (i.e. the rail score is between 60 and 80, including 80), the rail needs to be milled;

[0149] (4) When the rail damage status is level 1 (i.e., the rail score is 60 or below), rail replacement is required.

[0150] According to the rail condition scoring results given in Table 2, Figure 5 From the damage classification and maintenance recommendations, we can know that for single damage A1, A2, B1, and C1, the damage classification of the rails is level three, level three, level three, and level four respectively; the corresponding maintenance recommendations are milling, milling, milling, and grinding or milling; assuming that only the combination of C1 and A2 and the combination of B1 and A1 are considered, the damage classification of the rails is level three and level two respectively; the corresponding maintenance recommendations are grinding or milling, and milling; if all four of the above damages are considered, the damage classification of the rails is level two; the corresponding maintenance recommendation is milling.

[0151] In practical applications, after being combined with a rail detection vehicle, the overall and local damage states of the rail can be rapidly and automatically evaluated through the above scoring and evaluation method after damage detection. After one evaluation is completed, the rail can be monitored regularly. When new damage occurs, after determining its measurement parameters and the probability of being unavailable, the damage state of the rail can be scored and quantified. Thus, the time-series records 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.

[0152] The third embodiment of the present application provides a device for evaluating rail damage, which can be used to implement the method for evaluating rail damage in the above embodiment, as Figure 6 shown, the device for evaluating rail damage includes:

[0153] A data acquisition module, configured to acquire the measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within the evaluation interval of the rail; specifically, the data acquisition module can be used to implement step S10 and its optional embodiments in the first embodiment.

[0154] A first calculation module, configured to calculate the probability of being unavailable for each independent damage according to the measurement parameters; specifically, the first calculation module can be used to implement step S20 and its optional embodiments in the first embodiment.

[0155] A second calculation module, configured to obtain the rail availability probability of the rail section through the probabilities of being unavailable for the independent damages; specifically, the second calculation module can be used to implement step S30 and its optional embodiments in the first embodiment.

[0156] A damage evaluation module, configured to substitute the rail availability probability into the corresponding comprehensive evaluation model for evaluation; specifically, the damage evaluation module can be used to implement step S40 and its optional embodiments in the first embodiment.

[0157] Figure 7 is a structural schematic diagram of a computing device 700 provided by an embodiment of the present application. This computing device can execute the optional embodiments of the above method. This computing device can be a terminal or a chip or chip system inside the terminal. As Figure 7 shown, the computing device 700 includes: a processor 710, a memory 720, and a communication interface 730.

[0158] 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.

[0159] 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 a storage unit inside the processor 710, an external storage unit independent of the processor 710, or a component including a storage unit inside the processor 710 and an external storage unit independent of the processor 710.

[0160] Optionally, the computing device 700 may 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 the sake of convenience of representation, Figure 7 a line without an arrow is used in [description], but it does not mean that there is only one bus or one type of bus.

[0161] 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.

[0162] The memory 720 can 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 can also include a non-volatile random access memory. For example, the processor 710 can also store information about the device type.

[0163] 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.

[0164] 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 in 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 in the present embodiments. For the sake of brevity, they will not be elaborated herein.

[0165] Those of ordinary skill in the art can realize that the units and algorithm steps of the examples described in combination with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented by electronic hardware, or by a combination of computer software and electronic hardware. Whether these functions are executed in hardware or software 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.

[0166] 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 elaborated herein.

[0167] In the several embodiments provided in 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, and there may be other division methods in actual implementation. 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.

[0168] 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 the present embodiment.

[0169] In addition, the functional units in the various embodiments of the present application can be integrated in one processing unit, or each unit can exist physically separately, or two or more units can be integrated in one unit.

[0170] When the above-mentioned 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 this understanding, the technical solution of this 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 can be a personal computer, a server, or a network device, etc.) to execute all or part of the steps of the methods described in various embodiments of this application. The foregoing storage medium includes: various media such as USB flash drives, mobile hard disks, read-only memories (ROM), random access memories (RAM), magnetic disks, or optical discs that can store program codes.

[0171] The embodiments of this application also provide a computer-readable storage medium, on which a computer program is stored. When the program is executed by a processor, it is used to execute the above-mentioned method, and the method includes at least one of the solutions described in the above various embodiments.

[0172] The computer storage medium of the embodiments of this application can adopt any combination of one or more computer-readable media. The computer-readable medium can be a computer-readable signal medium or a computer-readable storage medium. The computer-readable storage medium can be, for example, but not limited to, an electrical, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, device, or component, 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 can be any tangible medium that contains or stores a program, and this program can be used by or combined with an instruction execution system, device, or component.

[0173] The computer-readable signal medium can include a data signal propagated in a baseband or as part of a carrier wave, which carries the computer-readable program code. Such a propagated data signal can take various forms, including but not limited to electromagnetic signals, optical signals, or any suitable combination of the above. The computer-readable signal medium can also be any computer-readable medium other than the computer-readable storage medium, and this computer-readable medium can send, propagate, or transmit a program for use by or combined with an instruction execution system, device, or component.

[0174] The program code contained on a computer-readable medium can be transmitted using any suitable medium, including but not limited to wireless, wire, optical fiber cable, RF, etc., or any suitable combination of the above.

[0175] The computer program code for performing the operations of the present application can 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 can 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 can 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 can be connected to an external computer (for example, by using an Internet service provider to connect through the Internet).

[0176] In addition, the terms "first," "second," "third," etc. or terms such as module A, module B, module C, etc. in the specification 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 can be interchanged when permitted, so that the embodiments of the present application described herein can be implemented in an order other than that illustrated or described herein.

[0177] 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 front and back steps can be interchanged when permitted, or they can be executed simultaneously.

[0178] The term "comprising" 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. Therefore, it should be interpreted as specifying the presence of the mentioned features, wholes, steps, or components, but does not exclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, wholes, steps, or components and their groups. Therefore, the expression "a device comprising device A and B" should not be limited to a device consisting only of components A and B.

[0179] As used herein, the term "one embodiment" or "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 appearances of the phrase "in one embodiment" or "in an embodiment" in various places in this specification are not necessarily all referring to the same embodiment, but may refer to the same embodiment. In addition, in one or more embodiments, the various specific features, structures, or characteristics can be combined in any suitable manner, as will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art from the present disclosure.

[0180] Note that the above is only a preferred embodiment 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. Without departing from the concept of the present application, more other equivalent embodiments can 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; measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within a rail section are collected; Calculating the unavailability probability of each independent damage based on the measurement parameters; Obtaining the rail availability probability of the rail segment through the unavailability probabilities of the independent damages; Substituting the rail availability probability into a corresponding comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the rail damage degree of the rail segment; Wherein, the independent damage is one of abrasion, fish scale, wave wear, fat edge, rail head drop, vertical wear, side wear, and weld depression, and the unavailability probability is Calculate according to the following formula: ; ; in, is the probability of repairing the damage, is the measurement parameter of the damage, is the standard parameter of the injury; is the adjustment coefficient; The independent damage is one of deformation and rail crack, and the unavailability probability Calculate according to the following formula: ; The independent damage is the peeling of pieces, and the unavailability probability Calculate according to the following formula: ; ; ; in, are the probabilities that the length and depth of the peeling block reach the serious injury standard, are the length and depth measurement parameters of the peeled-off block, are respectively the minimum length and minimum depth when the spalling fragments reach the serious injury standard; The independent damage is rail corrosion, the unavailability probability Calculate 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 rail waist thickness and rail bottom thickness when the rail is reduced to the serious damage standard due to corrosion, are the rail waist thickness and rail bottom thickness of the rail when it is first put into service, are the measured rail waist thickness and rail bottom thickness of the rail, are the thicknesses of the rail when the rail waist thickness and rail bottom thickness are reduced to the severe damage standard due to corrosion; The probability of rail availability of the rail segment is calculated according to the following formula: ; in, is the unavailability probability of one of the multiple independent damages.

2. 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 assessment score, ; is the scoring control coefficient, .

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

4. A rail maintenance method, based on the rail damage assessment method according to any one of claims 1 to 3, 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 location based on the measurement parameters; obtaining the rail availability probability of the rail segment based on the independent damage unavailability probabilities; substituting the rail availability probabilities into a corresponding comprehensive evaluation model to evaluate the degree of rail damage in the rail segment; Performing a comprehensive assessment of the rails based on the assessment results of the plurality of rail segments and providing maintenance recommendations 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.

5. A rail damage assessment device, based on the rail damage assessment method according to any one of claims 1 to 3, characterized in that: include: Data acquisition module, used to collect measurement parameters of multiple independent damages within the rail section; A first calculation module is used to calculate the unavailability probability of each independent damage according to the measurement parameters; a second calculation module, configured 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.

6. 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 rail damage assessment method according to any one of claims 1 to 3, or executes the rail maintenance method according to claim 4.

Images