首页> 外文会议>International Conference on Computer Aided Design, Manufacture and Operation in Railway and Other Advanced Mass Transit Systems >Comparing the performance of ERTMS level 2 fixed block and ERTMS level 3 moving block signalling systems using simulation techniques
【24h】

Comparing the performance of ERTMS level 2 fixed block and ERTMS level 3 moving block signalling systems using simulation techniques

机译:使用仿真技术比较ERTMS级别2固定块和ERTMS级别3移动块信令系统的性能

获取原文

摘要

The BB21 programme at Railinfrabeheer has been set up to realise the demands for intensified utilization of the Dutch railway network. The Bev21 is having a new signalling system developed according to the ERTMS specifications for level 2 with fixed blocks and for level 3 with moving blocks. Since the timely delivery of the ERTMS level 3 moving block system has become uncertain, RIB has conducted a research study to assess the differences in performance between the two systems. The main questions for the current research were: 1. What are the headways in a given number of normative situations? 2. What is the difference in performance between ERTMS level 2 fixed block and ERTMS level 3 moving block on a given set of routes that are representative for the Dutch railway network? To compute the headways, spreadsheet models have been developed. To assess the performance of the ERTMS level 2 and level 3 systems, three journey routes have been selected. For each journey route a timetable was given for the expected intensified use in 2010, with two levels of perturbation, to determine the ability of the systems to recover from perturbations. With these data, computer simulations models have been developed and run. The study revealed that headways in ERTMS level 3 are smaller than in ERTMS level 2 on the free track, even when short (200 m) blocks are used in ERTMS level 2. In station areas, headways in ERTMS level 2 are smaller than in ERTMS level 3. The results from the simulations showed that ERTMS level 3 moving block yields better overall performance than ERTMS level 2, although the differences are small in some cases. ERTMS level 2 performs better than ERTMS level 3 with fixed block, again with only small differences. We found significant differences in performance of both systems with respect to the production model and route characteristics. The study concluded that ERTMS level 3 moving block is the preferred system for the free track, whereas ERTMS level 2 is the preferred system for station areas. If ERTMS level 3 moving block is not available, then ERTMS level 3 fixed block is a good alternative to implement on the free track.
机译:RailinFrabeheer的BB21计划已经设立,以实现对荷兰铁路网络的加强利用需求。 BEV21具有新的信令系统,该系统根据具有固定块的2级和带有移动块的级别2的级别2级开发的信号系统。由于HERTMS 3级移动块系统的及时交付变得不确定,RIB已经进行了研究,以评估两个系统之间性能的差异。目前研究的主要问题是:1。给定数量的规范情况是什么? 2.在给定的一组路由中,ertms级别2固定块和ertms级别3移动块之间的性能之间的性能差异是什么?要计算头部,还开发了电子表格型号。为了评估ERTMS等级2和第3级系统的性能,已选择三条旅程路线。对于每条旅行路线,为2010年预期的加强使用提供了时间表,具有两级扰动,以确定系统从扰动中恢复的能力。使用这些数据,已开发和运行计算机仿真模型。该研究表明,即使在ertms级别2中使用短(200 m)块时,ertms级别3的头部比在自由轨道上的ertms级别2小于ertms级别2。在站点区域中,ertms级别2的头部小于ertms等级3.模拟结果表明,振仪级别3移动块产生比ERTMS等级2更好的整体性能,尽管在某些情况下差异很小。 ERTMS级别2使用固定块执行优于ERTMS级别3,再次仅具有小的差异。我们发现两个系统对生产模型和路线特征的性能显着差异。该研究得出结论,振仪级别3移动块是自由轨道的首选系统,而ERTMS等级2是车站区域的首选系统。如果不可用ertms级别3移动块,则ertms级别3固定块是在自由轨道上实现的替代方案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号