Dynamic Locomotive Grouping for Coupler Force Management

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Long rail vehicle systems experience undesirable forces and movements due to uniform throttle or brake settings across different grades and curvatures, leading to potential damage and degraded handling.

Innovation Solution

A method and system for determining asynchronous operational settings for propulsion-generating vehicles along a route, adjusting throttle and brake settings to match varying terrain conditions, reducing forces on couplers, and optimizing vehicle distribution to improve handling and reduce fuel consumption.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If uniform throttle or brake settings are used across all locomotives, then operational simplicity is maintained, but coupler forces and handling deteriorate on graded or curved tracks

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperational simplicityVSAvoidcoupler forces
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSForce

Solution Approach 1:

The system divides the train into multiple consists or groups of locomotives, each capable of independent throttle and brake control. This segmentation allows different portions of the train to operate with different settings optimized for their specific track conditions, resolving the contradiction between operational simplicity and coupler force management.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements location-specific operational settings where each locomotive or consist receives customized throttle and brake commands based on its position and the local track grade or curvature. This local quality approach ensures that each segment operates optimally for its specific conditions while maintaining overall system coordination.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Device complexity

If all locomotives use the same throttle settings, then control coordination is simplified, but rail car movements and handling deteriorate on hills

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol coordinationVSAvoidhandling
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts throttle and brake settings for different locomotives based on real-time or pre-calculated track conditions. Rather than static uniform settings, the control system continuously adapts each locomotive's operational parameters to maintain optimal handling while managing the complexity of coordinated control.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback from track condition data, locomotive performance sensors, and handling parameters to continuously adjust operational settings. This feedback loop allows the system to maintain coordinated control while adapting to changing conditions, resolving the contradiction between control simplicity and handling quality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Ease of operation

If synchronous operational settings are applied to all vehicles, then system-wide coordination is easier, but fuel consumption increases due to inefficient operation on varying grades

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem-wide coordinationVSAvoidfuel consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system changes operational parameters (throttle settings, brake application) for different locomotives based on their specific position and track conditions. This parameter optimization allows each locomotive to operate efficiently for its local conditions while maintaining system coordination through centralized or distributed control architecture.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The system pre-calculates or pre-determines optimal operational settings for different track segments and locomotive positions before operation begins. This preliminary action allows the system to implement fuel-efficient settings in advance while maintaining coordination, avoiding the need for complex real-time adjustments during operation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

4Ease of operation

If distributed power control with multiple consists is implemented, then handling on graded tracks improves, but system complexity and control architecture increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvehandling on graded tracksVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements a universal control architecture that can manage multiple consists and operational modes through a single integrated platform. This multi-functional approach allows the system to handle complex distributed power operations while maintaining a standardized control interface and methodology, reducing the perceived complexity for operators.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentUS9453735B2System and method for determining operational group assignments of vehicles in a vehicle system
Publication Date: 2016.09.27 TRANSPORTATION IP HOLDINGS LLC
  • US9453735B2 patent drawing
  • US9453735B2 patent drawing
  • US9453735B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A system and method for determining dynamically changing distributions of vehicles in a vehicle system are disclosed. The system and method determine handling parameters of the vehicle system. The handling parameters are determined for different distributions of the vehicles among different groups at different potential change points along a route. The system and method also determine whether to change the distributions at potential change points based on the handling parameters. Based on determining that the distributions are to change, a selected sequence of changes to the distributions is determined at one or more of the potential change points along the route. Change indices are generated based on the selected sequence. The change indices designate times and/or the one or more potential change points at which the distributions changes. The vehicles included in a common group have common designated operational settings while the vehicles are in the common group.