Lateral defense turnout optimization control method based on train state reporting

Abstract

The invention discloses a side defense turnout optimization control method based on train state reporting. The method comprises the steps that S1, whether a side defense turnout exists in front of a running train or not is judged; s2, if yes, judging that each side defense turnout meets the conditions of a scene 1, a scene 2 or other scenes; s3, adjusting, moving or keeping the original positions of different turnouts according to different satisfied scenes; and S4, finishing adjustment of all the side defense turnouts. According to the method, unnecessary turnout operation is reduced as much as possible in daily operation under the condition that safety is not affected, and safe and efficient operation of railway transportation is ensured.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

[0001] The present application belongs to a kind of based on reporting train state side switch optimization control method. BACKGROUND

[0002] Switch side protection refers to a protective measure taken when a train passes through a switch to ensure safe operation. Specifically, the role of switch side protection is to prevent side collision or derailment accidents when a train passes through a switch. This protective measure is usually implemented through a signal system, in which the protective switch: in some cases, a protective switch can be set to guide the train to pass through the switch area safely, avoiding derailment or side collision of the train. Specifically, side protection refers to controlling the positioning or reverse positioning of the switch to prevent other trains from entering the same route from the side, thereby ensuring safe operation. This protective measure is similar to the handling method of double-acting switches and lead switches in railways.

[0003] When side protection is taken, the main purpose is to prevent other trains from entering the route from the side and colliding with the train in the route from the side. This side protection is usually similar to the handling of double-acting switches and lead switches in railways. The side protection is to ensure the safe operation of the route, and the side protection is ensured by the protective switch and the display of a red signal. The switch control of urban rail transit is usually single-acting, without double-acting switches, and all crossover switches are handled as single-acting. There are also no lead switches. This is the basis for the optimization of side switch control in this patent, i.e. crossover switches can be handled separately.

[0004] Generally, the switch is a first-level side protection, and the signal machine is a second-level side protection. When arranging the route, first find the first-level side protection, then find the second-level side protection. When there is no first-level side protection, the signal machine is used as side protection.

[0005] The task of side protection is to operate, lock and detect adjacent diverging switches so that all paths leading to the arranged running route cannot be established. Side protection can also be obtained through the main signal machine with a stop display and located in the direction of the running route with side protection requirements. In the route table, a side protection area has been designed for each running route. If side protection of a switch is adopted, but the actual position of the switch does not match the required position, a command to switch the position of the switch should be issued. When this command cannot be executed (the switch is locked and cannot be operated), the operation command will be stored until the required terminal position is reached. Otherwise, the operation command is cancelled by cancelling or unlocking the running route.

[0006] For example, as shown in Figure 8 , in the first stage of the execution of the station rear turnaround (51 platform to PS25), the main route 4103 switch is in a side position; as shown in Figure 9As shown, when performing the second stage of the rear turnback at station PS5-52, the protection approach 4103 turnout is in the straight position.

[0007] The side protection position is actually a legacy of the previous large iron double acting turnout principle. Due to the double acting nature of 4103 and 4102, the previous large iron system does not support one turnout in the side position and the other in the straight position, despite the intention to prevent unintended movement of the train at station 51 during the execution of the second stage of the turnback approach, which could result in a collision. However, the 4103 turnout needs to be moved twice (once to the side position and once to the straight position) every time the turnback approach is executed. Although this may improve safety to some extent, the frequent movement of the turnout may objectively cause the following problems:

[0008] Mechanical wear and performance degradation: During frequent movement of the turnout, its mechanical parts will be subjected to greater wear and tear. For example, key components such as the frog heart and the point rail are prone to wear, deformation, and even breakage, which can affect the normal function and service life of the turnout. In addition, the rotating joints of the turnout will also be worn out during frequent operation, leading to poor contact and affecting the stability and safety of the electrical circuit.

[0009] Increased risk of train safety: Frequent movement of the turnout may cause changes in the geometric dimensions of the turnout, such as poor adhesion between the point rail and the main rail, which can cause train sway when the train passes through, increasing the risk of derailment. At the same time, the harmful space of the turnout may also expand due to frequent use, leading to unstable train operation and even derailment accidents.

[0010] Increased maintenance costs: Frequent movement of the turnout can exacerbate the wear and tear of its components, requiring more frequent maintenance and replacement. This not only increases the workload of maintenance personnel but also increases maintenance costs.

[0011] Signal system failure: Frequent operation of the turnout can affect the normal operation of the signal system. For example, track circuit failure may be exacerbated by frequent movement, leading to incorrect display of train dispatch information and causing serious safety accidents.

[0012] Influence of environmental factors: In adverse weather conditions (such as high or low temperatures), the structure of the turnout may expand or contract due to temperature changes, further exacerbating the wear and tear and deformation problems of the turnout.

[0013] It may affect operational efficiency as it requires waiting time for the movement of a side protection turnout.

[0014] In summary, frequent movement of the turnout can have a significant negative impact on the safety, stability, and economy of the railway system.

[0015] Therefore, a side switch optimization control method based on reporting train status is provided. SUMMARY

[0016] To solve the above problems in the prior art, the present application provides a side switch optimization control method based on reporting train status, which realizes reducing unnecessary switch operation in daily operation without affecting safety and ensures the safety and efficient operation of railway transportation.

[0017] The technical solution to achieve the above object is:

[0018] A side switch optimization control method based on reporting train status, comprising:

[0019] Step S1, judging whether there is a side switch in front of the running train;

[0020] Step S2, if so, judging whether each side switch meets scenario 1, scenario 2 or other scenario conditions;

[0021] Step S3, adjusting different switches according to different scenarios that meet and moving or keeping the original position;

[0022] Step S4, until all side switches are adjusted.

[0023] Preferably, in the step S2, the scenario 1 condition is:

[0024] The associated section of the running train is not occupied by any train and is not covered by a route.

[0025] Preferably, in the step S2, the scenario 2 condition is:

[0026] The associated section is only occupied by a controlled train and is not covered by a route, or the associated section is only covered by the route of the controlled train regardless of occupation or idleness.

[0027] Preferably, in the step S2, the other scenarios include: other scenario 1, other scenario 2 or remaining other scenarios.

[0028] The other scenario 1 condition is:

[0029] The associated section is occupied by a non-controlled train but is not covered by a route.

[0030] The other scenario 2 condition is:

[0031] The associated section is covered by a moving route of a non-controlled train.

[0032] Preferably, in the step S3, if the scenario 1 condition is met, it is considered that no train needs the associated section, at this time the train on the reversing route has no potential side collision risk, the protection switch is not moved and remains in the original lateral position.

[0033] Preferably, in the step S3, if the scenario 2 condition is met, it is ensured that the train on the reversing route has no potential side collision risk, even if the train has mode degradation, the end of the route movement authorization is parked, the protection switch is not moved and remains in the original lateral position.

[0034] Preferably, in the step S3, if the other scenario 1 condition is met, it is proved that the train on the reversing route still has a potential side collision risk, the protection switch needs to be moved and remains in the straight position, which is consistent with the current interlocking implementation.

[0035] Preferably, in the step S3, if the other scenario 2 condition is met, the routes that conflict with each other will not be issued until the protection switch of the protection section of the route is moved to the straight position, which is consistent with the current interlocking implementation.

[0036] Preferably, in the step S3, if the remaining other scenario condition is met, the control is performed according to the existing side protection logic.

[0037] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the present application are: the present application realizes that in the daily operation, unnecessary switch operation should be reduced as much as possible without affecting safety, to ensure the safety and efficient operation of railway transportation, to reduce the significant negative impact of frequent switch movement on the safety, stability and economy of the railway system;

[0038] Switches are important components of railway systems, but their mechanical structures are complex and are prone to wear and tear. Each movement will cause some wear and tear to its parts, and frequent operation will cause faster wear and tear, thereby increasing the frequency of maintenance and replacement and related costs. Reducing the number of switch movements can directly reduce these maintenance costs and prolong the service life of the switch. In addition, the working environment of switch maintenance personnel is usually harsh, and frequent maintenance work will increase their labor intensity and safety risk. Reducing the number of switch movements can reduce the workload and improve work safety;

[0039] The movement of the switch needs to consume electricity or other energy, and reducing the number of movements can save energy and reduce operating costs, in line with the concept of green environmental protection;

[0040] Switch failure is an important reason for train delay, and reducing switch operation can reduce the probability of failure and thus reduce economic losses caused by delay;

[0041] There is a certain risk in each time the turnout is moved, and reducing the number of turnout movements can significantly reduce the probability of these risks occurring, improving the safety of railway transportation;

[0042] Reducing the number of turnout movements can not only bring significant economic benefits, reduce maintenance costs and energy consumption, but also improve the safety of railway transportation, reduce accident risks, and ultimately improve the overall efficiency and reliability of the railway system. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

[0043] The accompanying drawings are included to provide a further understanding of the application, and constitute a part of the specification, together with the embodiments of the application, to explain the application, and do not constitute a limitation on the application. In the drawings:

[0044] Figure 1 is a flowchart of a side protection turnout optimization control method based on the reported train status according to the present application;

[0045] Figure 2 is another flowchart of a side protection turnout optimization control method based on the reported train status according to the present application;

[0046] Figure 3 is a schematic diagram of a G4103 train meeting scenario 1 conditions in a pre-turnout section associated with 4103 turnout in an embodiment of the present application;

[0047] Figure 4 is a schematic diagram of a G4103 train meeting scenario 2 conditions in which only the associated section is occupied by a controlled train and has no approach conditions in a pre-turnout section associated with 4103 turnout in an embodiment of the present application;

[0048] Figure 5 is a schematic diagram of a G4103 train meeting scenario 2 conditions in which only the associated section is occupied by a controlled train and has no approach conditions in a pre-turnout section associated with 4103 turnout in an embodiment of the present application;

[0049] Figure 6 is a schematic diagram of a G4103 train meeting other scenario 1 conditions in a pre-turnout section associated with 4103 turnout in an embodiment of the present application;

[0050] Figure 7 is a schematic diagram of a G4103 train meeting other scenario 2 conditions in a pre-turnout section associated with 4103 turnout in an embodiment of the present application;

[0051] Figure 8 is a schematic diagram of a first stage (51 platform to PS25) when performing a post-station turnaround in a traditional technical solution, in which the 4103 turnout as the main approach is in a lateral position;

[0052] Figure 9is a schematic view of the second stage (PS5-52 platform) when the train is performing a U-turn at the execution station, and the protection route 4103 turnout is in the straight position. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0053] The technical solutions in the embodiments of the present application will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the drawings in the embodiments of the present application. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present application, rather than all the embodiments. Based on the embodiments in the present application, all other embodiments obtained by a person of ordinary skill in the art without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present application.

[0054] The current CBTC (Communication-Based Train Control) is an advanced track traffic signal system, which is widely used in urban track traffic and railway systems. Its core feature is to realize the two-way communication between the train and the ground equipment by using wireless communication technology, so as to realize real-time monitoring and control of train operation.

[0055] CBCT only breaks through the limitation of interlocking in the real-time tracking of the train, but still uses the traditional interlocking control logic in the side protection turnout control mentioned in the background technology, and there are some problems mentioned in the background technology.

[0056] The present application focuses on innovating according to the train state of all associated turnout front sections of all protection turnouts in the route, and minimizing unnecessary turnout movement without reducing the safety level of train operation.

[0057] In this example, the turnout front section bit G4103 associated with the 4103 turnout, the train (which can be a CBTC train or not) is performing a U-turn at the 51 station-PS25-52 station, and the second stage of the U-turn route PS25-52, at this time, what is needed is that the current 4103 is not locked in the straight position required by the interlocking side protection.

[0058] As shown in Figure 1 , 2 A side protection turnout optimization control method based on reporting train state, comprising:

[0059] Step S1, determining whether there is a side protection turnout in front of the running train.

[0060] Step S2, if there is, determining whether each side protection turnout meets scene 1, scene 2 or other scene conditions.

[0061] In the embodiment, the scene 1 condition is:

[0062] No trains were occupying the section of track where the train was traveling, and there was no route coverage.

[0063] In the embodiment, the conditions for scenario 2 are:

[0064] The associated section is occupied by only one controlled train and is not covered by any route, or the associated section is covered by only the route of a controlled train, whether occupied or vacant.

[0065] In this embodiment, other scenarios include: other scenario 1, other scenario 2, or the remaining other scenarios;

[0066] Other scenario 1 conditions are:

[0067] The relevant section is occupied by uncontrolled trains, but there is no route coverage;

[0068] The conditions for other scenario 2 are:

[0069] The associated section is covered by the movement routes of uncontrolled trains.

[0070] Step S3: Adjust different turnouts according to different scenarios, either moving them or keeping them in their original positions.

[0071] In the embodiment, if the conditions of scenario 1 are met, it is considered that no train needs this associated section. At this time, the trains on the turnaround route have no potential side collision risk, and the protective switch does not move and remains in its original lateral position.

[0072] like Figure 3 As shown, if the section is empty and there are no routes, it means that no trains need to use the G4103 section. Trains using the turnaround route at this time have no potential risk of side collision. 4103 can be left in its original lateral position without being used as a protective turnout, so that the turnaround route for the next train can be implemented as soon as possible.

[0073] In the embodiment, if the conditions of scenario 2 are met, the train executing the turnaround route has no potential side-dash risk. Even if the train undergoes mode downgrade, it can still stop before the end of the route movement authorization. Currently, the protective switch does not move and remains in its original lateral position.

[0074] like Figure 4 As shown in Figure 5, since the movement of the train depends on the route issued by the ZC (area controller), in this case, as a SIL4 system, the ZC cannot issue a route with potential side-run risk. Therefore, the train executing the turnaround route has no potential side-run risk. Even if the train undergoes mode degradation, it can still stop before the end of the route movement authorization. 4103 can be left in its original lateral position without being used as a protective turnout, so that the turnaround route of the next train can be implemented as soon as possible.

[0075] The above two scenarios represent the vast majority of turnaround operations. By analyzing the status of the associated sections of the protective turnouts on the turnaround route, the inspection of the status of the side protective turnouts can be removed.

[0076] In the embodiment, if other scenario 1 conditions are met, it proves that the train on the turnaround route still has a potential risk of side collision, and the protective switch needs to be moved and kept in a straight position, consistent with the current interlocking implementation method;

[0077] like Figure 6 As shown, although signal X4105 in front of the uncontrolled train is a prohibition signal, considering the scenario of the train running a red light, the train on the turning route still has a potential risk of side collision. Therefore, 4103, as a protective turnout, needs to be kept in the straight position, consistent with the current interlocking implementation method.

[0078] In this embodiment, if other scenario 2 conditions are met, conflicting routes will not be issued until the protective turnout of the protected section of the route is moved to a straight position, which is consistent with the current interlocking implementation method.

[0079] like Figure 7 As shown, at this time, as a ZC device of a SIL4 system, it will not issue conflicting routes until the turnout of the protected section 4103 of the route is moved to the straight position, which is consistent with the current interlocking implementation method.

[0080] In this embodiment, if the remaining other scenario conditions are met, control is performed according to the existing side-defense logic.

[0081] Step S4 continues until all side turnouts have been adjusted.

[0082] Based on the target of a 3-minute turnaround efficiency during morning and evening peak hours and a 5-minute turnaround efficiency during off-peak hours, the number of turnaround operations can be reduced by half under normal circumstances. Specifically, with 16 hours of operation per day (peak hours: 4 hours), at least 288 turnaround operations can be reduced per day, and nearly 100,000 turnaround operations can be reduced per year.

[0083] Finally, it should be noted that the above are merely preferred embodiments of the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those skilled in the art can still modify the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments or make equivalent substitutions for some of the technical features. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A side frog optimization control method based on reporting train status, characterized in that, The method comprises the following steps: Step S1, judging whether there are side protection switches in front of the running train; Step S2, if there are, judging whether each side protection switch meets the scene 1, scene 2 or other scene conditions; Step S3, adjusting or keeping the original position of different switches according to different scenes; Step S4, until all side protection switches are adjusted.

2. The side frog switch optimization control method based on reporting train status according to claim 1, characterized in that, In the step S2, the scene 1 condition is that there is no train occupation in the section associated with the running train, and there is no route coverage. In the step S2, the scene 2 condition is that the associated section is only occupied by a controlled train and has no route coverage, or the associated section is only covered by the route of the controlled train whether it is occupied or idle.

3. The side frog switch optimization control method based on reporting train status according to claim 1, characterized in that, In the step S2, the other scenes include other scene 1, other scene 2 or remaining other scenes. The other scene 1 condition is that the associated section is occupied by a non-controlled train, but has no route coverage.

4. The side frog switch optimization control method based on reporting train status according to claim 1, characterized in that, The other scene 2 condition is that the associated section is covered by the moving route of the non-controlled train. In the step S3, if the scene 1 condition is met, it is considered that there is no train that needs the associated section, and the train on the return route has no potential side collision risk, so the protection switch is not moved and kept in the original lateral position. In the step S3, if the scene 2 condition is met, the train on the return route has no potential side collision risk, and even if the train has mode degradation, it can guarantee that the train stops before the end of the route movement authorization, so the protection switch is not moved and kept in the original lateral position. In the step S3, if the other scene 1 condition is met, it is proved that the train on the return route still has potential side collision risk, so the protection switch needs to be moved and kept in the straight position, which is consistent with the current interlocking implementation. In the step S3, if the other scene 2 condition is met, the routes that conflict with each other will not be issued until the protection switch of the protection section of the route is moved to the straight position, which is consistent with the current interlocking implementation.

5. The method of claim 2, wherein, In the step S3, if the remaining other scene condition is met, the existing side protection logic is followed for control.

6. The method of optimizing control of a side frog according to the state of a train based on a report according to claim 3, characterized in that, ​ 7. The method of claim 4, wherein the method further comprises: ​ 8. The side frog switch optimization control method based on reporting train status according to claim 4, characterized in that, ​ 9. The method of claim 4, wherein, ​

Images