Hinderdetektering på den svenska järnvägen- En jämförelse mellan dagens och framtidens hinderdetekteringssystem
(2019) VTVL01 20191Transport and Roads
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Syftet med detta examensarbete är att utreda vilka hinderdetekteringssystem som finns tillgängliga idag eller som är under utveckling, och att ta reda på vilket system som är bäst ur ett tekniskt och samhällsekonomiskt perspektiv.
Med hinderdetektering menas de system som finns på järnvägen för att detektera var på järnvägen det finns ett hinder. Det kan t.ex. vara ett tåg, en godsvagn eller ett arbetsfordon. Hinderdetekteringen ligger till grund för stora delar av järnvägens signalanläggning. Det är nödvändigt ur ett säkerhetsperspektiv att vid alla tillfällen veta var spårfordon, både i drift och stillastående, befinner sig på järnvägen.
De system som är i drift idag (spårledningar, axelräknare och RFID), samt system som är under... (More) - Syftet med detta examensarbete är att utreda vilka hinderdetekteringssystem som finns tillgängliga idag eller som är under utveckling, och att ta reda på vilket system som är bäst ur ett tekniskt och samhällsekonomiskt perspektiv.
Med hinderdetektering menas de system som finns på järnvägen för att detektera var på järnvägen det finns ett hinder. Det kan t.ex. vara ett tåg, en godsvagn eller ett arbetsfordon. Hinderdetekteringen ligger till grund för stora delar av järnvägens signalanläggning. Det är nödvändigt ur ett säkerhetsperspektiv att vid alla tillfällen veta var spårfordon, både i drift och stillastående, befinner sig på järnvägen.
De system som är i drift idag (spårledningar, axelräknare och RFID), samt system som är under utveckling (GPS-baserad ”moving block”) har jämförts. Aspekter som har tagits i beaktning är bl.a. systemfunktioner, detekteringshastigheter, påverkan från yttre faktorer, livscykelkostnader, signalfelsstatistik och orsakade förseningsminuter. Signalfelsstatistik från Trafikverket, Öresundsbrokonsortiet och brittiska Network-Rail har vägts samman. Livscykelkostnader från Network-Rail och IRSE (Nya Zeeland) har jämförts.
Den sammanvägda statistiken visar att axelräknare och spårledningar generellt sett är lika pålitliga idag, men att det finns vissa miljöomständigheter som markant försämrar spårledningar men inte påverkar axelräknare i lika stor utsträckning, bl.a. fukt. Dessa miljöomständigheter kortsluter spårledningar utan närvaron av ett spårfordon (så kallad falsk beläggning), vilket leder till signalfel och därmed mer avhjälpande underhåll. Livscykelkostnaderna för de två system varierar mellan de båda länder som har jämförts, där axelräknare är avsevärt billigare än spårledningar i det ena fallet (Storbritannien), men lite dyrare i det andra fallet (Nya Zeeland).
Sammanvägs alla dessa aspekter så är axelräknare generellt bättre kostnadsmässigt samt ur ett tekniskt perspektiv, och avsevärt bättre under vissa omständigheter. GPS-baserad ”moving block” och RFID har potential att till en viss grad ersätta både spårledningar och axelräknare i framtiden. Dessa system är dock under utveckling och inte tillämpbara i dagsläget. (Less) - Abstract
- The main purpose of this thesis is to investigate which track vacancy detection systems are available today or under development, and determine which system is best from a technical and economically perspective.
Track vacancy detection systems exist to supervise the railway and indicate if a track section is occupied with an obstacle, e.g. a train, freight wagon or maintenance vehicle. These train vacancy detection systems are the basis of the majority of signalling systems, for example interlocking and automatic block signalling. It is necessary from a safety point of view to always know where rail-vehicles, both stationary and nonstationary, are located.
A comparison between systems that are in use today (track circuits, axle... (More) - The main purpose of this thesis is to investigate which track vacancy detection systems are available today or under development, and determine which system is best from a technical and economically perspective.
Track vacancy detection systems exist to supervise the railway and indicate if a track section is occupied with an obstacle, e.g. a train, freight wagon or maintenance vehicle. These train vacancy detection systems are the basis of the majority of signalling systems, for example interlocking and automatic block signalling. It is necessary from a safety point of view to always know where rail-vehicles, both stationary and nonstationary, are located.
A comparison between systems that are in use today (track circuits, axle counters and RFID), as well as systems under development (GPS-based “moving block”), has been made. Aspects such as specific system characteristics, maximum detection speeds, the influence of external factors (e.g. weather, temperature, humidity), life cycle costs, signal failures, delay minutes etc. have been taken into consideration. Statistics about signal failures and delay minutes have been provided by the Swedish Transport Administration, Oresund Bridge Consortium and British Network-Rail. Life Cycle costs have been provided by IRSE and Network-Rail.
Both track circuits and axle counters are equally reliable, as shown by the signal failure statistics. However, there are specific environmental circumstances (humidity for instance) where axle counters are significantly more reliable and therefore more profitable. These circumstances cause track circuits to short-circuit without the presence of a track-vehicle, which results in increased maintenance costs, as experienced by the Oresund Bridge Consortium. The life cycle costs provided by IRSE and Network-Rail are partially inconclusive, with one stating that track circuits are somewhat less expensive compared to axle counters, and another stating that axle counters are significantly less expensive compared to track circuits. In conclusion the study shows that axle counters, compared to track circuits, is a better track vacancy detection system from an economical as well as technical point of view, and considerably better under certain circumstances. GPS-based “moving block” and RFID have the potential to replace both track circuits and axle counters to a certain extent in the future. These systems however, are under development and not yet applicable. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8990908
- author
- Smakic, Benjamin LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Track vacancy detection on the Swedish railway- A comparison between today’s and future track vacancy detection systems
- course
- VTVL01 20191
- year
- 2019
- type
- M3 - Professional qualifications ( - 4 Years)
- subject
- keywords
- Hinderdetekteringssystem, spårledningar, axelräknare, ERTMS, RFID, livscykelkostnader, signalfel. Track vacancy detection systems, track circuits, axle counters, life cycle costs, signal failures.
- report number
- ISRN LUTHBG/THID-19/5581
- ISSN
- 1651-2197
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8990908
- date added to LUP
- 2019-08-05 08:24:57
- date last changed
- 2019-08-09 09:25:38
@misc{8990908,
abstract = {{The main purpose of this thesis is to investigate which track vacancy detection systems are available today or under development, and determine which system is best from a technical and economically perspective.
Track vacancy detection systems exist to supervise the railway and indicate if a track section is occupied with an obstacle, e.g. a train, freight wagon or maintenance vehicle. These train vacancy detection systems are the basis of the majority of signalling systems, for example interlocking and automatic block signalling. It is necessary from a safety point of view to always know where rail-vehicles, both stationary and nonstationary, are located.
A comparison between systems that are in use today (track circuits, axle counters and RFID), as well as systems under development (GPS-based “moving block”), has been made. Aspects such as specific system characteristics, maximum detection speeds, the influence of external factors (e.g. weather, temperature, humidity), life cycle costs, signal failures, delay minutes etc. have been taken into consideration. Statistics about signal failures and delay minutes have been provided by the Swedish Transport Administration, Oresund Bridge Consortium and British Network-Rail. Life Cycle costs have been provided by IRSE and Network-Rail.
Both track circuits and axle counters are equally reliable, as shown by the signal failure statistics. However, there are specific environmental circumstances (humidity for instance) where axle counters are significantly more reliable and therefore more profitable. These circumstances cause track circuits to short-circuit without the presence of a track-vehicle, which results in increased maintenance costs, as experienced by the Oresund Bridge Consortium. The life cycle costs provided by IRSE and Network-Rail are partially inconclusive, with one stating that track circuits are somewhat less expensive compared to axle counters, and another stating that axle counters are significantly less expensive compared to track circuits. In conclusion the study shows that axle counters, compared to track circuits, is a better track vacancy detection system from an economical as well as technical point of view, and considerably better under certain circumstances. GPS-based “moving block” and RFID have the potential to replace both track circuits and axle counters to a certain extent in the future. These systems however, are under development and not yet applicable.}},
author = {{Smakic, Benjamin}},
issn = {{1651-2197}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Hinderdetektering på den svenska järnvägen- En jämförelse mellan dagens och framtidens hinderdetekteringssystem}},
year = {{2019}},
}