Rail Vehicle Configuration Profiles and Virtual Validation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for configuring and changing operating parameters in rail vehicles are complex, time-consuming, and prone to errors, requiring precise processes and qualified personnel, which can lead to safety issues and inefficiencies, especially when adapting to different routes, infrastructure, or customer-specific requirements.

Innovation Solution

A system that combines operating parameters and rules into profiles, allowing for easy selection, activation, and deactivation of these profiles using a data processing unit with a selection unit, input unit, and reception unit, enabling rapid and error-free configuration of vehicle fleets or individual vehicles, with options for manual, automatic, or semi-automatic profile changes.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If operating parameters are changed using traditional precise prescribed change processes, then safety is maintained, but configuration changes become time-consuming and complex

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoidconfiguration change time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent pre-validates configuration changes by simulating them in a virtual model before actual implementation. The configuration model is updated with proposed changes, and system behavior is simulated to detect errors beforehand. This preliminary validation ensures safety while enabling faster actual deployment since the changes have already been verified.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent creates a virtual copy of the rail vehicle's configuration system. Changes are first applied to this virtual model rather than the actual physical system. The virtual configuration model mirrors the real system's structure and relationships, allowing error-free testing and validation before committing changes to production, thus maintaining safety while reducing time constraints.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

2Reliability

If configuration changes are made by qualified personnel following precise processes, then error probability is reduced, but operational complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror probabilityVSAvoidconfiguration process complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs self-validation through automated simulation and error detection mechanisms. When configuration changes are proposed, the system automatically simulates their effects and detects potential errors without requiring manual verification by qualified personnel. This self-service approach reduces error probability while simplifying the operational process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a feedback mechanism where the virtual configuration model provides immediate information about potential errors in proposed changes. The system simulates system behavior and feeds back error messages if conflicts are detected, allowing operators to correct issues before implementation. This automated feedback reduces both error probability and process complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Productivity

If fleet-wide configuration changes are implemented simultaneously, then efficiency is improved, but risk of systematic errors increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveconfiguration deployment efficiencyVSAvoidsystematic error risk
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent validates configuration changes in the virtual model before fleet-wide deployment. By pre-testing changes in the virtual configuration model and detecting errors beforehand, the system enables safe simultaneous implementation across the entire fleet, achieving high efficiency without propagating systematic errors.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

4Reliability

If detailed validation processes are performed for each configuration change, then reliability is maintained, but productivity decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveconfiguration reliabilityVSAvoidconfiguration change speed
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses a virtual copy of the configuration system to perform detailed validation. All rigorous checks and simulations are executed in this virtual model rather than on the actual system. This allows comprehensive reliability validation without impacting real-world productivity, as the validation occurs in parallel in the virtual environment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs detailed validation in advance in the virtual configuration model before actual deployment. By completing all necessary checks, simulations, and error detections beforehand, the patent ensures configuration reliability while enabling rapid actual implementation, thus maintaining productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS11772690B2Apparatus and method for configuring systems in rail vehicles
Publication Date: 2023.10.03 KNORR BREMSE SYST FUR SCHIENENFAHRZEUGE GMBH
  • US11772690B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The invention relates to an apparatus for configuring systems, the apparatus being positioned as intended in a rail vehicle and comprising—a data-processing unit—information-transmitting connections between the data-processing unit and the systems—a selection unit for selecting a saved profile—an input unit for inputting operating parameters—a receiving unit for receiving additional or altered profiles.