Railway vehicle axle counting method

Abstract

The invention comprises the following subject matter: a method for counting axles of a track-guided vehicle. The invention also comprises a railway system having a plurality of axle counting sensors (AZ, AZ1, AZ2) mounted on a track (GL). The invention also includes a computer program product containing program instructions. The invention also comprises a computer readable storage medium containing data.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention includes a method for counting axles of a rail-guided vehicle. The present invention also includes a railway system having a plurality of axle counting sensors mounted on a track. The present invention also includes a computer program product containing program instructions. The present invention also includes a computer-readable storage medium containing data. Background Art

[0002] The prior art uses a classic axle counting method, in which signal strength is monitored to see if a threshold is exceeded. Each time this threshold is exceeded, an axle is counted. This method is relatively fast and reliably counts the events mentioned. However, exceeding the threshold can also be caused by influences other than the passage of an axle (wheel). Until now, these disturbances have been suppressed based on deterministic rules (such as signal strength or duration). This method is also known as the Multi-Axle Counting method (MAZV for short). However, identifying more complex faults is a challenge.

[0003] Methods for replacing axle counting with artificial intelligence-based solutions have been described in the prior art. However, these methods have so far failed in terms of safety (in the sense of functional safety, also known as security) and algorithm runtime, and therefore have not been able to exploit the potential for improved error detection. For example, document EP 4124539 A1 describes how to implement such artificial intelligence (AI) methods, such as identifying bogie tandems as axle miscounts in bogie counting methods (BCs).

[0004] From the explained prior art, the problem arises that currently only axle counting systems with high functional reliability but limited detection reliability or with limited functional reliability but with the potential for improved error detection are available, whereas no system combines all advantages.

[0005] EP 4 124 539 A1 describes a method for counting vehicle axles, in which wheels pass by track-mounted axle counter sensors that generate measurement signals. The measurement signal profile is evaluated using a computer. When evaluating the measurement signal profile, at least one maximum value in the signal amplitude is sought. During amplitude normalization, the amplitude of the measurement signal is normalized so that the maximum value is equal to a predetermined target value. Dynamic time normalization is performed on the measurement signal profile before and after the maximum value. Summary of the Invention

[0006] The object of the present invention is to eliminate the problems described in the prior art. Specifically, the invention provides a method for counting axles of rail-guided vehicles, a railway system having axle counting sensors suitable for carrying out the method, a computer program, and a computer-readable storage medium having such a computer program, which allow improved error detection when counting axles without compromising the functional reliability of the axle counter.

[0007] According to a first aspect of the invention, a method for counting axles of rail-guided vehicles is described, wherein:

[0008] a) The wheels of the vehicle pass by at least two axle counting sensors installed on the track,

[0009] b) Each axle counter sensor generates a measurement signal,

[0010] c) Computer-assisted evaluation of the profile of the measurement signal of each axle counter sensor, wherein the axle number is respectively identified based on the passing wheels of the vehicle.

[0011] The function of axle counter sensors is well known. They typically generate an electromagnetic field that changes when a vehicle passes the sensor. This allows the vehicle's wheels and axles to be detected. One or more axle counter sensors can be installed in an axle counter (more on this below). Furthermore, a processor for processing the measurement data provided by the axle counter sensors can also be integrated into the axle counter, with the processor being part of a computing environment for computer-assisted evaluation of the data from the axle counter sensors. Alternatively or additionally, this data processing can also be performed by a central processor in a computing environment external to the axle counter.

[0012] A device is computer-assisted or computer-implemented if it has at least one computer or processor, or a method is computer-assisted or computer-implemented if at least one computer or processor performs at least one method step of the method.

[0013] A computing environment is an IT infrastructure consisting of functional components such as processors, storage units, programs, and the data to be processed by the programs, used to execute at least one application program required to complete a task. Other functional components may include sensors and actuators, which enable the computing environment to interact with the outside world. IT infrastructure can also be organized as a network of these functional components.

[0014] Computing instances form functional units within a computing environment that can be assigned to applications (e.g., represented by multiple program modules) and can execute them. When executing applications, these functional units form independent systems, physically (e.g., computers, processors) and / or virtually (e.g., program modules).

[0015] A computer is an electronic device with data processing capabilities that consists of multiple functional components. A computer can be, for example, a client, server, handheld computer, communication device, or other electronic device used for data processing. It may have a processor and a storage unit and may also be connected to a network via an interface.

[0016] A processor can be, for example, a converter, a sensor for generating measurement signals, or an electronic circuit. It can be a main processor (central processing unit, CPU), a microprocessor, a microcontroller, or a digital signal processor, possibly combined with a memory unit for storing program instructions and data. The term "processor" can also be understood as a virtualized processor or soft CPU.

[0017] The storage unit can be designed as a computer-readable memory in the form of a working memory (random access memory, RAM) or a data memory (hard drive or data carrier).

[0018] A program module is a separate software functional unit that is capable of implementing a program sequence according to the method steps of the present invention. These software functional units can be implemented in a single computer program or in multiple computer programs that communicate with each other. The interfaces implemented here can be implemented using software within a single processor or, if multiple processors are used, can be implemented using hardware.

[0019] The interface may be implemented using hardware, such as a wired or wireless connection, or using software, such as interaction between various program modules of one or more computer programs.

[0020] To avoid misunderstandings, it should be noted that the individual claim features are numbered using small Latin letters, regardless of the claim number. This means that each letter appears only once throughout the entire set of claims, allowing clear resolution of the relevant claim features without specifying the claim number. However, this is why the order of the letters is not significant.

[0021] According to the present invention,

[0022] The evaluation of the measurement signals takes place in two evaluation routines, namely

[0023] e) a first evaluation routine in which a first axle counting result representative of a passing wheel is recorded if the measurement signal exceeds a threshold value, and

[0024] f) a second evaluation routine, in which a second axle counting result representing a wheel that has passed is recorded if sufficient agreement with a predetermined pattern representing the relevant second axle counting result is ascertained within the scope of the pattern comparison, taking into account the permitted tolerance deviations,

[0025] and

[0026] g) determining the number of axles of the vehicle based on the first axle counting result and checking for deviations between the axle numbers identified in this way, and

[0027] h) determining the number of axles of the vehicle based on the second axle counting result and checking for deviations between the axle numbers identified in this manner, wherein:

[0028] i) An error signal is generated only in the first case, ie, a different number of axles of the vehicle is determined based on the first axle counting result and a different number of axles of the vehicle is determined based on the second axle counting result.

[0029] According to the present invention, two evaluation routines are provided for evaluating the measurement signals from the axle counters. These two evaluation routines are run redundantly in the method (hereinafter referred to as evaluation redundancy). Evaluation redundancy means that if the method is carried out without interruption, the two evaluations of the measurement signals each provide the same evaluation result. The evaluation result is the determined axle counting result (in particular, the number of axles) of one or more relevant axle counters of the vehicle.

[0030] In the first case alone, computer-assisted evaluation of the measurement signals may not provide sufficiently reliable results regarding the identified axles. This can occur when different axle counts are determined for a vehicle based on the first axle counting result and different axle counts are determined for a vehicle based on the second axle counting result. Therefore, provision is made for the generation of an error signal, which can directly influence vehicle control methods operating in the railway system, in order to initiate safety measures (such as emergency braking) in the operation of the affected vehicle.

[0031] The advantage of redundant evaluation is that, if a measurement error or evaluation error occurs, in which the evaluation routines can provide different results, it is possible to evaluate which result is classified as reliable and therefore used for the method. This evaluation is preferably computer-assisted, with an error signal being generated only if a reliable result cannot be determined.

[0032] For example, the error signal can be output via an interface. This interface can operate an output device intended for human perception. However, it can also be used to process the error signal within an automated process for controlling the railway system to which the axle counter belongs. In any case, the error signal leads to the functional reliability (safety) of the track-guided vehicle, thereby avoiding a safety-critical incident. The safety measures involve the vehicle in question or the vehicles following it and can include, for example, emergency braking of these vehicles.

[0033] According to another aspect of the present invention, a railway system is described, comprising a plurality of axle counting sensors installed on a track and a computing environment. According to this aspect, the present invention provides a computing environment configured to perform a method according to any of the preceding claims. The advantages associated with this aspect of the invention have already been explained above, and reference is made to these advantages.

[0034] According to another aspect of the present invention, a computer program product comprising program instructions executable by a computing environment is described. According to this aspect, according to the present invention there is provided a method according to any one of claims 1-5.

[0035] According to the present invention, a computer program product comprising program modules is described by program instructions, whereby the program modules can be executed in the same computing instance or in multiple computing instances of a computing environment. By means of a computer program product, which may comprise one or more computer programs, the method according to the present invention and / or its exemplary embodiments can be executed, and the advantages described above can be achieved through such execution.

[0036] According to another aspect of the invention, a computer-readable storage medium is described, which contains data stored by the storage medium as a data set. According to this aspect, it is provided that the data set enables the above-mentioned computer program product to be executed according to the preceding claim.

[0037] Furthermore, a provisioning device for storing and / or providing a computer program in the form of a computer-readable storage medium is described. The provisioning device is, for example, a storage unit that stores the computer program and makes it available for retrieval. Alternatively or additionally, the provisioning device is a network service, a computer system, a server system, in particular a distributed one, such as a cloud-based computer system or a virtual computer system, which stores the computer program on a computer-readable storage medium and preferably provides it in the form of a data stream.

[0038] The provision is carried out in the form of a program data set describing the program modules as a file of the computer program product (in particular as a download file) or as a data stream (in particular as a download data stream). For example, the computer program product is transferred to a computing environment using a provisioning device so that the method according to the invention can be executed in one or more computing instances of the computing environment.

[0039] Variants are explained below that describe further developments of the invention without restricting the basic idea of ​​the invention.

[0040] According to a variant, the above-mentioned aspects of the invention are defined as follows:

[0041] j) in the second case, determining the number of identical axles of the vehicle based on the first axle counting result, and

[0042] k) in a third case, the number of different axles of the vehicles is determined solely on the basis of the first axle counting result, and the number of identical axles of the vehicles is determined on the basis of the second axle counting result,

[0043] l) Carrying out a free report of the track section enclosed by the axle counter.

[0044] The advantage of this variant is that the described redundancy in the evaluation means that in some cases, despite discrepancies in the evaluation, it is possible to draw a conclusion with sufficient certainty about the actual number of axles of a vehicle that has passed the relevant axle counter. In particular, it is possible to confirm with sufficient certainty that a vehicle has the same number of axles when entering a track section as when leaving it. Axle counters are provided at the beginning and end of this track section to determine whether the vehicle has completely stopped (i.e., has not been lost) while passing through it.

[0045] According to this variant of the invention, the following relationship applies, ensuring the safety of the improved axle counting method. In the second scenario described above, the measured values ​​determined using MAZV are sufficiently reliable to achieve the required safety. This is a proven process that has been used for a long time. In other words, when determining the same axle number, the probability of an incorrect axle count result the first time is so low that safety is guaranteed. Therefore, in this case, the relevant track section is always reported as free.

[0046] Therefore, the second axle counting result of the BC method can be ignored. This is likely because these results are less secure against errors. In other words, if the same axle count is determined here, the second axle counting result confirms the first. In this case, the overall axle counting result is, so to speak, additionally insured. In the other case, if the axle counting results using the BC method are different, the probability that the first axle counting result is correct and the second is incorrect is sufficiently high. This justifies releasing the track section based on the first axle counting result.

[0047] In the third case, where the MAZV provides different axle counting results, a track vacancy report cannot be made if this method is used alone, as in the prior art. However, according to the present invention, the axle counting results of the BC method are also usable in this case. If the MAZV provides different axle counting results, the probability of a counting error is high, while the probability of a missing car is much lower. Therefore, although the BC method alone does not provide sufficient safety for a track vacancy report, the second axle counting result can still be used as a safety measure. Given the high probability of counting errors in the MAZV, if the BC method determines the same number of axles, it can be assumed with sufficient certainty that no car has been lost, and a track vacancy report can be issued. This creates added value, namely that the combination of the MAZV and BC methods can achieve higher availability and sufficient functional reliability in railway system operation.

[0048] According to a variant, the above-mentioned aspects of the invention are defined as follows:

[0049] In the first case according to the above feature i), after confirming that a different axle number of the vehicle has been determined based on the first axle counting result, it is waited until the axle number of the vehicle is determined based on the second axle counting result and then an error signal is generated if necessary.

[0050] The advantage of this variant is that it increases the availability of the method. If the BC method takes a long time to provide an axle counting result, no error signal is generated if the MAZV has already provided a different axle counting result. Instead, a different axle counting result awaiting the MAZV can either be secured using the BC method in the manner described above (resulting in an error signal) or classified as a counting error (resulting in the release of the track section).

[0051] When discrepancies occur in axle counting results, the available timeframe plays a significant role. The BC method typically runs slower than the MAZV, but parallel in time and is only used when the MAZV confirms a discrepancy in the initial axle counting results. However, this does not represent a safety issue (e.g., according to UIC code 790), but rather an availability issue. In this case, a delay of up to a few seconds is acceptable, as the operational time required to correct the fault is in the range of minutes and is safety-critical (basic location of the faulty segment).

[0052] According to a variant, the above-mentioned aspects of the invention are defined as follows:

[0053] m) specifying a waiting time (e.g. 10 seconds) after confirming that different axle numbers are determined according to the first axle counting result and until the axle number of the vehicle is determined according to the second axle counting result,

[0054] n) If the axle number of the vehicle has not yet been determined based on the second axle counting result, an error signal is generated after the time period has elapsed.

[0055] The advantage of this variant is that the amplification is additionally protected. As mentioned above, operational repair of the fault condition can be delayed for a certain period of time without creating an unacceptable safety risk. However, if the calculation of the second axle counting result takes too long (e.g., due to a system crash), safety measures must still be initiated promptly. According to this variant, this is achieved by generating an error signal if the safety risk is too great, even without the second axle counting result.

[0056] According to a variant, the above-mentioned aspects of the invention are defined as follows:

[0057] In the pattern comparison according to the above feature f), the pattern representing the passage of the vehicle bogie is used as the axle counting result, wherein the axle counting result is equivalent to counting the majority of the axles assigned to the bogie with the aid of a computer.

[0058] The advantage of this variant is that both the first and second axle counting results directly include the counted axles. This advantageously allows them to be directly compared with one another. For example, an additional query can be inserted to determine whether the first axle counting result matches the second axle counting result. If this is not the case, an error signal may be output. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0059] The present invention will now be described in further detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. Identical or corresponding elements of the drawings are provided with the same reference numerals in the various drawings and are explained a number of times only if there are differences between the various drawings.

[0060] The exemplary embodiments explained below are preferred embodiments of the present invention. In the exemplary embodiments, each component of the described embodiments represents a variant of the present invention that can be considered independently of one another, which also develops the present invention independently of one another and is therefore also considered to be part of the present invention, either individually or in combinations different from the combinations shown. In addition, the described components can also be combined with the above-described variants of the present invention.

[0061] Figure 1 Schematically shows an exemplary embodiment of the device according to the present invention and the cause-effect relationship between the functional components used. Figure 1 An exemplary embodiment of a computing environment of a device is shown as a block diagram of various functional components and the interfaces formed between them, where each computing instance executes program modules, each program module can run in one or more processors as shown, and the interfaces shown can therefore be implemented in software in a computer or in hardware between different computers.

[0062] Figure 2 An example of a signal curve of an axle counter and its signal processing is shown (measured signal strength U1, U2 as a function of time t).

[0063] Figure 3 An exemplary embodiment of the method according to the present invention is shown in a flow chart, wherein the method steps shown can be implemented individually or in groups by program modules, and wherein according to Figure 2 The calculation instances and interfaces are shown exemplarily. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0064] Figure 1 A vehicle FZ is shown traveling on a track GL in a direction of travel FR. The vehicle FZ has a bogie DG, each of which is provided with two axles. Figure 1 Indicated by wheel RD.

[0065] As soon as the wheel RD passes the first axle counter AZL1 with the first axle counter sensor AZ1 and the second axle counter sensor AZ2, the measuring signals U1, U2 (see Figure 2 ) produces pulses in the variation curve (this will be described in detail below).

[0066] Axle counters AZL1 and AZL2 are connected to an evaluation unit AE having a first processor PR1. This processor PR1 is connected to the first axle counter AZL1 and the second axle counter AZL2 via a sixth interface S6. This allows, via the sixth interface S6, free-space reporting of the track section GA between the first axle counter AZL1 and the second axle counter AZL2 by evaluation using the first processor PR1. Instead of two axle counter sensors per axle counter, a single axle counter sensor can also be used. Therefore, the single axle counter sensor of the second axle counter AZL2 is designated by the reference symbol AZ. This is shown merely as an example. Both a single axle counter sensor and two axle counter sensors (dual axle counter) can be used in each of the axle counters AZL1 and AZL2.

[0067] The evaluation unit AE also contains a first memory device SE1 which is connected to the first processor PR1 via a fifth interface S5. This contains, for example, a program for executing the method according to the invention and a library with different modes M1, M2 (see Figure 2 ), which is used for certain curves to be measured VL1, VL2 represented by standardized curves NV1, NV2, NV3 (see Figure 2 ).

[0068] Furthermore, the first processor PR1 is connected via a third interface S3 to a second processor PR2 of a computer CP in the control center LZ. The second processor PR2 is also connected via a fourth interface S4 to a second storage device SE2 of the computer CP. The control center represents a trackside device, such as a signal box or an automatic train control system.

[0069] The vehicle FZ and the control center LZ have antennas AT so that they can communicate with each other via the second interface S2. In addition, the vehicle FZ can communicate with the satellite STL via the first interface S1. In this way, for example, the vehicle FZ can be located, wherein the satellite STL is a navigation satellite.

[0070] The method according to the invention has program modules that can be executed on the first processor PR1 or the second processor PR2. Depending on how "intelligent" the axle counting device formed by the axle counter AZL and the evaluation unit AE is designed, a processor (not shown) can also be used in the axle counter, for example, to pre-process the measurement signals. This is understood to be part of the computing environment RU.

[0071] exist Figure 2 In the embodiment of the present invention, a flow chart is used to illustrate the process of the method according to the present invention. The schematic diagram of the signal curve is selected to explain the individual process steps. Figure 2 In the upper part of FIG, the variation curve VL1 of the first axle counter AZL1 and the variation curve VL2 of the second axle counter AZL2 are shown. For this purpose, a diagram is selected in which the measurement signals U1 , U2 are displayed in the form of output voltage over time t. Figure 2 The lower part of FIG. 4 shows the results of the normalization processes NV1, NV2, NV3, NV4 and the subsequent processing steps in comparison with the modes M1, M2.

[0072] Furthermore, curves VL1 and VL2 show the passage of two wheels (axles) of the bogie. This is evident because, in addition to the first maximum M1, curves VL1 and VL2 also show a second maximum M2 that is very similar to the first maximum M1. The first and second maximums M1, M2, are each separated by a uniform time offset ZVR between the wheel passages. This time offset ZVR corresponds precisely to the time difference between the wheel passages of the first and second wheels RD of the bogie DG.

[0073] In the first evaluation routine, all maximum values ​​above the threshold SW are counted. This is the typical operating method for axle counters based on the MAZV principle. Clearly, two maxima are determined in curve VL1, and three maxima are determined in the second curve VL2. The third maximum is caused by the abutment of the wheel flange against the track side, which in turn is caused by the curved arrangement of the axle counters. Clearly, the first evaluation routine counts three axles in one case and two in the second. This can lead to counting errors, preventing the track section from being reported as free.

[0074] The second evaluation routine for pattern comparison according to the BC principle is performed as follows.

[0075] In order to generate the normalized curves NV1, NV2, NV3, NV4, the method according to the invention performs a normalization N in a manner not shown. This normalization consists in normalizing the amplitudes of the measurement signals U1, U2 to a target value ZW, which is calculated according to Figure 2 In the exemplary embodiment, 1. Furthermore, a dynamic time normalization is performed, whereby the first variation curve VL1 or the second variation curve VL2 is considered before and after the identified maximum values ​​M1, M2, M3, so that the variation curves associated with the maximum values ​​M1, M2, M3 can be characterized (and compared with the patterns M1, M2, as will be described in more detail below). This results in the creation of normalized curves NV1, NV2, NV3, NV4 in time windows ZF1, ZF2, ZF3, whose time ranges correspond to the patterns MT1, MT2 (no pattern is created for normalized curve NV4, since, in this case, no maximum values ​​exceeding the threshold value SW can be determined, apart from the noise indicated in the first variation curve VL1).

[0076] It can be seen that the evaluation of the first maximum value M1 leads to the generation of a first normalization curve NV1, and the evaluation of the second maximum value M2 leads to the generation of third normalization curves NV3 (the course of U2) and NV4 (the course of U1). Furthermore, the third maximum value M3 is not visible in the first course curve VL1 but is visible in the second course curve VL2, which leads to the generation of a second normalization process NV2.

[0077] In the final step, a pattern comparison is performed on the standardized curves NV1, NV2, and NV3. This results in both the first and third standardized curves NV1 and NV3 matching the first pattern MT1, indicating wheel passage. This results in a count of 2. The second standardized curve NV2 is identified using the second pattern MT2, indicating wheel flange contact with the rail side. Therefore, standardized curve NV2 is excluded from the count (indicated by an X). Thus, according to the BC principle, axle consistency is determined during vehicle entry and exit, enabling idle reporting.

[0078] exist Figure 2 As shown in the figure, the mode MT1 and the second mode MT2 have a hatched confidence range that allows for certain fluctuations relative to the standardized curves NV1, NV2, and NV3. This accounts for the fact that the measured variation curves VL1 and VL2 are subject to certain tolerance fluctuations. In addition to measurement tolerances, it must also be taken into account that different vehicles generate different measurement signals, which depend, for example, on factors such as wheel wear.

[0079] The method according to the present invention will be explained step by step as follows. Figure 3 The computer-assisted steps take place in a processor not shown in detail. For the sake of clarity, the reading of data from the memory unit and the storage of data in the memory unit are omitted.

[0080] In a first step 1 , the process starts (short: start).

[0081] In the second step 2, the axle count is performed using the first axle counter AZL1 (abbreviated: MSE1) as the vehicle passes. The result is a first curve VL1 of the measurement signal.

[0082] In a third step 3, axle counting is performed using the second axle counter AZL2 (abbreviated: MSE2) as the vehicle passes. The result is a second curve VL2 of the measurement signal.

[0083] In a fourth step 4, a multi-axis counting method is performed, wherein each exceeding of a threshold value by the measurement signal is counted as an axis, e.g. Figure 2 As described in (abbreviated as: MAZV). As a result, the number of axes N1 of the first measurement and the number of axes N2 of the second measurement are determined.

[0084] In a fifth step 5, the number of axles is determined in parallel with the fourth step 4, but with a longer method time, according to the bogie counting method (BC for short). This involves Figure 2 The pattern comparison explained in , whereby after completion of the method the axis number N1 is also determined for the first measurement and the axis number N2 for the second measurement.

[0085] In the sixth step 6, it is determined whether the first axis number is equal to the second axis number, both determined using the MAZV method (in short: N1=N2?). If this is the case, proceed to the seventh step 7. In the other case, proceed to the eighth step 8.

[0086] In the seventh step 7, a free report of the track GL (abbreviated as CLR) is made. In this case, the vehicle can continue to travel because it has completely left the relevant track section GA.

[0087] In the eighth step 8 , a waiting loop (abbreviated as WT) is executed. This is done so that the BC method according to the fifth step 5 is generally not yet completed.

[0088] In the ninth step 9, it is checked whether the axis numbers N1, N2 determined using the BC method already exist (in short: N1, N2?). If so, the process continues with the tenth step 10. If not, a recursive process is performed to repeat the eighth step 8.

[0089] In the tenth step 10, a query is made as to whether the first axis number is equal to the second axis number, both of which are determined using the BC method (in short: N1 = N2?). If so, the process continues with the seventh step 7. Otherwise, the process continues with the eleventh step 11.

[0090] In an eleventh step 11 , an error signal (abbreviated: ERR) is generated. In a subsequent twelfth step 12 , the method is stopped, thereby stopping the vehicles whose axles were counted by the relevant axle counters with different results.

[0091] If the seventh step 7 has already been executed to release the track section GA, then in the thirteenth step 13, the second axle number N2 is set equal to the first axle number N1 (in short: N2 -> N1), since the vehicle has entered the subsequent track section GA. The process then recursively returns to the third step 3, where the second measurement step is performed again at the end of the new track section GA to determine the second axle number N2 again. The method then follows the further process explained above.

[0092] Reference Signs List

[0093] 2 Counting results

[0094] AE Evaluation Unit

[0095] AT antenna

[0096] AZ, AZ1, AZ2 axle counter sensors

[0097] AZL1…AZL2 axle counter

[0098] CP1…CP2 computers

[0099] DG bogie

[0100] FR travel direction

[0101] FZ vehicle

[0102] GA track section

[0103] GL track

[0104] LZ Control Center

[0105] M1…M3 maximum value

[0106] MT1…MT2 Mode

[0107] N Normalization

[0108] NV1…NV4 normalized curve

[0109] RD wheels

[0110] RU computing environment

[0111] S1…S5 interface

[0112] SE1…SE2 storage device

[0113] STL Satellite

[0114] SW threshold

[0115] U1…U2 measuring signals

[0116] VL1…VL2 variation curve

[0117] X Exclude

[0118] ZF1…ZF3 time window

[0119] ZVR Time offset between wheel passes

[0120] ZW target value

Claims

1. A method for counting axles of rail vehicles, wherein: a) The wheels of the vehicle (RD) pass by at least two axle counters (AZ, AZ1, AZ2) installed on the track (GL), b) Each axle counter sensor (AZ, AZ1, AZ2) generates a measuring signal (U1...U2), c) computer-assisted evaluation of the profile (VL1 ... VL2) of the measurement signal (U1 ... U2) of each axle counter sensor (AZ, AZ1, AZ2), wherein the axle number is respectively identified based on the wheel (RD) of the vehicle passing by, d) If there is a discrepancy between the number of axes identified, an error signal is generated. in, The evaluation of the measurement signals takes place in two evaluation routines, namely e) a first evaluation routine in which a first axle counting result representative of a passing wheel (RD) is recorded if the measurement signal exceeds a threshold value, and f) a second evaluation routine, in which the second axle counting result representing the passing wheel (RD) is recorded if sufficient agreement with a predetermined pattern representing the associated second axle counting result is ascertained within the scope of the pattern comparison, taking into account the permitted tolerance deviations, And among them, g) determining the number of axles of the vehicle based on the first axle counting result and checking for deviations between the axle numbers thus identified, and h) determining the number of axles of the vehicle based on the second axle counting result and checking for deviations between the axle numbers thus identified, And among them, i) generating an error signal only in the first case, ie, in the case where a different number of axles of the vehicle is determined based on the first axle counting result and a different number of axles of the vehicle is determined based on the second axle counting result, It is characterized in that In the first case according to feature i), after confirming that a different axle number of the vehicle has been determined based on the first axle counting result, it is waited until the axle number of the vehicle has been determined based on the second axle counting result and then, if necessary, an error signal is generated.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that j) in the second case, determining the number of identical axles of the vehicle based on the first axle counting result, and k) in a third case, the number of different axles of the vehicles is determined solely on the basis of the first axle counting result, and the number of identical axles of the vehicles is determined on the basis of the second axle counting result, l) Carry out a free report of the track section (GA) of the track (GL) enclosed by the axle counters.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that m) specifying a time period to wait after confirming that different axle numbers are determined based on the first axle counting result until the axle number of the vehicle is determined based on the second axle counting result, n) If the axle number of the vehicle has not yet been determined based on the second axle counting result, an error signal is generated after the time period has elapsed.

4. The method according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that In the pattern comparison according to feature f) of claim 1 , a pattern representing the passage of a vehicle bogie is used as an axle counting result, wherein the axle counting result is equivalent to counting a number of axles assigned to the bogie with the aid of a computer.

5. A railway system comprising a plurality of axle counter sensors (AZ, AZ1, AZ2) mounted on a track (GL) and a computing environment (RU) for evaluating the profiles of the measurement signals of the axle counter sensors (AZ, AZ1, AZ2), It is characterized in that The computing environment (RU) is arranged to perform the method according to any of the preceding claims.

6. A computer program product comprising program instructions executable by a computing environment (RU) so as to perform the method according to any one of claims 1 to 4.

7. A computer-readable storage medium comprising data stored by the storage medium as a data set, such that the data set renders the computer program product according to the preceding claim executable.

Images