Railway Braking Control Method Using Multi-Factor Decision Logic

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing railway vehicle braking systems fail to optimize braking behavior due to lack of centralized control and consideration of various interacting factors, leading to sub-optimal deceleration management and excessive braking distances, which can result in accidents.

Innovation Solution

A control method for the braking system that calculates deceleration differences and selects appropriate influencing means based on mission, advantage, disadvantage, field response, and system state factors, including wear and environmental conditions, to ensure optimal braking performance.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If centralized control based on adhesion coefficient is implemented, then braking force distribution is improved, but all interacting factors affecting deceleration are not considered

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvebraking force distributionVSAvoidconsideration of interacting factors

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The control method integrates multiple braking components (regenerative brake, friction brake, parking brake) and multiple decision factors (mission factor, advantage/disadvantage factors, field response factors, system state factors) into a single centralized control system. This universal approach allows the system to consider all interacting factors simultaneously rather than relying on a single adhesion coefficient metric, thereby resolving the contradiction between improved braking force distribution and comprehensive adaptability to various operating conditions.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Device complexity

If braking force is generated from estimate of desired and applied braking force, then control is simplified, but non-linear and atmospheric conditions are not taken into account

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecontrol complexityVSAvoiddeceleration management

Core Design Contradiction:

Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces multiple intermediary decision factors that mediate between the simple force estimation and the complex deceleration management. These include mission factors (service/emergency braking), advantage/disadvantage factors of each braking component, field response factors (adhesion, temperature, precipitation), and system state factors (wear, saturation). These intermediaries translate complex non-linear and atmospheric conditions into actionable control decisions, maintaining reliability while managing complexity through structured factor analysis.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Ease of operation

If individual braking components are controlled independently, then control is simpler, but full braking potential is not utilized

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecontrol simplicityVSAvoidbraking potential

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges control of multiple independent braking components (regenerative brake, friction brake, parking brake) into a unified centralized control system. The controller evaluates all components simultaneously using comprehensive decision factors and coordinates their combined operation. This merging allows the system to utilize the full braking potential of all components working together rather than independently, while maintaining ease of operation through automated centralized decision-making that selects and coordinates the optimal combination of braking actions.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #5Merging (Combining)

4Device complexity

If wear and effectiveness of brake influencing means are not considered, then control is simpler, but braking distances increase and safety is compromised

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecontrol complexityVSAvoidbraking distance and safety

Core Design Contradiction:

Device complexityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements feedback mechanisms by continuously monitoring system state factors including wear state of braking components and effectiveness of brake influencing means. This feedback information is fed back to the centralized controller, which adjusts braking component selection and coordination in real-time. For example, if wear is detected on friction brake pads, the controller can compensate by relying more on regenerative braking or adjusting friction brake application. This feedback loop maintains optimal braking performance and safety without requiring overly complex manual monitoring and adjustment procedures.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentEP3678904B1Control method of a braking system of at least one railway vehicle

Publication Date: 2021.11.10 FAIVELEY TRANSPORT ITAL SPA

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

AI summary

A control method of a braking system of at least one railway vehicle comprising a plurality of deceleration influencing means (2) is described, including the steps of: - calculating a deceleration difference between a target deceleration and at least an estimated effective deceleration; - selecting at least one influencing means (2) depending on the deceleration difference and at least one of the following decision factors: a) mission factor, b) advantage and disadvantage factors inherent to each deceleration influencing means, c) field response factors indicative of the environmental conditions surrounding the at least one rail vehicle, and (d) system state factors; - controlling the selected at least one deceleration influencing means according to the deceleration difference and at least one of the aforesaid decision factors.