This disclosure relates to the field of railway track inspection and assessment systems.
Rail infrastructure owners are motivated to replace the time consuming and subjective process of manual crosstie (track) inspection with objective and automated processes. The motivation is driven by a desire to improve rail safety in a climate of increasing annual rail traffic volumes and increasing regulatory reporting requirements. Objective, repeatable, and accurate track inventory and condition assessment also provide owners with the innovative capability of implementing comprehensive asset management systems which include owner/region/environment specific track component deterioration models. Such rail specific asset management systems would yield significant economic benefits in the operation, maintenance and capital planning of rail networks.
A primary goal of such automated systems is the non-destructive high-speed assessment of railway track infrastructure. Track inspection and assessment systems currently exist including, for example, Georgetown Rail (GREX) Aurora 3D surface profile system and Ensco Rail 2D video automated track inspection systems. Such systems typically use coherent light emitting technology, such as laser radiation, to illuminate regions of the railway track bed during assessment operations.
An important consideration after field data collection of railway data is the manner in which the data is processed. One of the most time-consuming tasks is to identify different railway track features and to categorize and track such railway track features.
What is needed, therefore, is a robust and reliable system for analyzing and processing data collected during and/or after a high speed assessment of a railway track. What is also needed is a system that is able to quickly and accurately identify railway track features and associate measured parametric data with those features.
The above and other needs are met by a three dimensional track assessment system (“3DTAS”). The 3DTAS has a number of novel features including surface elevation model 3D block matching based correlation; extraction, identification, and categorization of unfamiliar 3D track features; detection of rail head and rail base locations; detection and categorization of railway tie distresses; measuring and reporting of ballast level anomalies (leading/trailing berms/voids indicating rail stress, shoulder ballast voids); reporting the location and type of tie anchors (and the offset from the corresponding tie edge); measuring and reporting the location, size and type of rail joint bars (and detect and report the presence of the through bolts and nuts); reporting the presence of rail base welds (and any planar vertical deviations across the weld due to differences in rail height, and the distance of the weld from the nearest tie); measuring and reporting the presence and severity of rail head distortion (crushed heads or corrugation) including battered joints; and the reporting and identification of types of other track materials (OTM).
The 3DTAS algorithms run on a system processor as described herein which automatically processes full width track surface elevation and intensity data to identify 3D features and extract physical parameters of interest. Such discrete 3D feature identification and analysis methods are based on surface elevation model (3D) block matching based correlation. As unfamiliar features are encountered, 3D surface models for the features are developed and physical parameters are defined for extraction. The extensibility of the rule-based expert system architecture used for interpretation during processing allows the refinement of existing parameters and/or the development of rules and physical parameters as new features or track components are encountered.
In one embodiment, tie condition (distress) is detected and categorized based on acquired 3D data. Condition analysis algorithms define the severity (based on depth, width and/or proximity to other features such as spikes or tie-ends for example) and extent (based on the area or the end to end length of the distress for example) of all surface distresses. These individual distresses are combined using developed client specific algorithms to rate the quality of each tie. Each distress feature is recorded and maintained in a fully referenced feature database that allows future comparisons at the individual distress level. The objective, accurate and repeatable measurements possible with the 3DTAS system allows the direct comparison of individual distresses and distress components on a tie-by-tie basis for subsequent surveys (temporal comparison), an important capability for the development of accurate deterioration models required for asset management system development.
A system for assessing a railway track bed is disclosed, the system comprising a power source; a light emitting apparatus powered by the power source for emitting light energy toward a railway track; a data storage apparatus in communication with at least one processor; at least one sensor for sensing reflected light that was emitted from the light emitting apparatus and acquiring three dimensional image data of the railway track to be stored in the data storage apparatus, wherein the plurality of sensors are in communication with the at least one processor; and the at least one processor wherein the at least one processor is configured to run an algorithm for processing three-dimensional elevation data gathered from the plurality of sensors and saved in the data storage apparatus, the algorithm comprising the steps of: (a) acquiring three dimensional data representative of a segment of railway track bed; (b) generating a track elevation map based on the acquired three dimensional data; (c) identifying a railway track bed feature from the track elevation map; and (d) storing information corresponding to the identified railway track bed feature in the data storage apparatus.
The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of identifying a rail head edge by detecting significant vertical gradient edges over a two dimensional area wherein such vertical gradient edges are greater than a minimum rail height threshold.
The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of identifying a rail base edge by detecting significant vertical gradient edges over a two dimensional area adjacent the detected rail head edge wherein such vertical gradient edges are greater than a minimum rail base height threshold.
The algorithm described above may further include the step of removing data corresponding to the rail head from the elevation map, thereby enhancing the detection of other smaller vertical components of the railway track bed.
The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of detecting surfaces with surface normal values greater than a planar region surface normal value threshold and that are proximate to one another by less than a maximum proximity threshold. The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of defining an approximate tie surface plane based on the detected surfaces with surface normal values greater than the planar region surface normal value threshold that are proximate to one another by less than the maximum proximity threshold.
The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of assigning a tie bounding box around the perimeter of the tie surface plane based at least on one measured parameter of the tie surface plane. The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of assigning an approximate tie length, an approximate tie width, and an approximate tie skew angle based on the bounding box assigned around the perimeter of the tie surface plane. The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of identifying and measuring surface cracks that are deeper than a minimum crack depth threshold and that are longer than a minimum crack length threshold based on the track elevation map. The data corresponding to the measured surface cracks may be saved to the data storage apparatus on a per tie basis so that the same tie can be re-examined at a later date to determine whether the measured surface cracks have changed. The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include a step of assigning a severity value to each measured crack based on at least the measured length and measured width of the crack.
The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature further comprises the step of identifying and measuring a surface feature that is higher than a minimum tie height threshold. The data corresponding to the measured surface feature may be saved to the data storage apparatus on a per tie basis so that the same tie can be re-examined at a later date to determine whether the measured surface feature has changed.
The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of detecting a broken tie based on an abrupt elevation shift along the tie surface plane.
The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of comparing at least a portion of the track elevation map to a plurality of three dimensional features saved in a feature library to determine a best fit between the at least a portion of the track elevation map and the plurality of three dimensional features to properly identify the railway track bed feature. The algorithm step of comparing may further include the step of applying a minimum correlation threshold so that a railway track bed feature will not be identified as a particular three dimensional feature from the feature library unless the minimum correlation threshold is met.
The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of determining a shoulder ballast volume adjacent a tie based at least in part on the approximate tie surface plane defined for the tie.
The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of defining a surface area region adjacent the tie bounding box, measuring the surface elevation of the surface area region, and determining the difference between the surface elevation of the surface area region and the surface elevation of the approximate tie surface plane to determine whether a positive volume or negative volume is present at the surface area region.
The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of making a plurality of elevation measurements along and around an identified railway track bed feature and recording the measurements and the locations of the measurements in the data storage apparatus. The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of assigning a condition to the identified railway track bed feature based on the plurality of elevation measurements.
The algorithm step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of measuring the length of a joint bar candidate, determining whether the length of the joint bar candidate falls between a minimum joint bar length threshold and a maximum joint bar length threshold, and identifying the joint bar candidate as a joint bar if the length measurement of the joint bar candidate falls between a minimum joint bar length threshold and a maximum joint bar length threshold.
A system for assessing a railway track bed is disclosed, the system comprising a power source; a light emitting apparatus powered by the power source for emitting light energy toward a railway track; a data storage apparatus in communication with at least one processor; at least one sensor for sensing reflected light that was emitted from the light emitting apparatus and acquiring three dimensional image data of the railway track to be stored in the data storage apparatus, wherein the plurality of sensors are in communication with the at least one processor; and the at least one processor wherein the at least one processor includes an algorithm for extracting railway track bed surface elevation data to define new railway track bed components for a three dimensional track feature library, the algorithm comprising the steps of: (a) acquiring three dimensional data representative of a segment of railway track bed; (b) generating a track elevation map based on the acquired three dimensional data; (c) identifying a railway track feature from the track elevation map that does not match any previously defined track features saved in a track feature library; (d) extracting three dimensional data from the track elevation map corresponding to the identified railway track feature; (e) assigning a feature name to the extracted three dimensional data; and (f) saving in the data storage apparatus the extracted three dimensional data associated with the feature name as a new track feature to be included in the track feature library.
A method of building a virtual three dimensional railway track bed component library is disclosed, the method comprising the steps of emitting a light along a track bed surface; sensing some of the emitted light after it has reflected off of the track bed surface; defining a three dimensional elevation map based on the sensed light reflected from the track bed surface; storing the elevation map in a data storage apparatus; identifying a railway track bed feature from the three dimensional elevation map that does not match any previously defined track bed features saved in a track component library; extracting three dimensional data from the track elevation map corresponding to the identified railway track bed feature; assigning a component name to the extracted three dimensional data; and saving the extracted three dimensional data associated with the component name in a data storage apparatus as a new track bed feature to be included in the track component library.
A method of assessing a railway track bed is disclosed, the method comprising the steps of defining a three dimensional elevation map based on data gathered by a sensor sensing reflected light from a track bed surface; storing the elevation map in a data storage apparatus; identifying a railway track bed feature from the elevation map; and storing information corresponding to the identified railway track bed feature in the data storage apparatus.
The step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of identifying a rail head edge by detecting significant vertical gradient edges over a two dimensional area wherein such vertical gradient edges are greater than a minimum rail height threshold.
The step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of identifying a rail base edge by detecting significant vertical gradient edges over a two dimensional area adjacent the detected rail head edge wherein such vertical gradient edges are greater than a minimum rail base height threshold.
The step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of comparing at least a portion of the track elevation map to a plurality of three dimensional features saved in feature library to determine a best fit to properly identify the railway track bed feature.
The step of comparing may further include the step of applying a minimum correlation threshold so that a railway track bed feature will not be identified as a particular three dimensional feature from the feature library unless the minimum correlation threshold is met.
The step of identifying a railway track bed feature may further include the step of measuring the length of a joint bar candidate, determining whether the length of the joint bar candidate falls between a minimum joint bar length threshold and a maximum joint bar length threshold, and identifying the joint bar candidate as a joint bar if the length measurement of the joint bar candidate falls between a minimum joint bar length threshold and a maximum joint bar length threshold.
The method of claim 26 further comprising the step of removing data corresponding to the rail head from the elevation map, thereby enhancing the detection of other smaller vertical components of the railway track bed.
The method described above may further include the step of detecting surfaces with surface normal values greater than a planar region surface normal value threshold and that are proximate to one another by less than a maximum proximity threshold. The method may further include the step of defining an approximate tie surface plane based on the detected surfaces with surface normal values greater than the planar region surface normal value threshold that are proximate to one another by less than the maximum proximity threshold. The method may further include the step of assigning a tie bounding box around the perimeter of the tie surface plane based at least on one measured parameter of the tie surface plane. The method may further include the step of assigning an approximate tie length, an approximate tie width, and an approximate tie skew angle based on the bounding box assigned around the perimeter of the tie surface plane.
The method described above may further include the step of identifying and measuring surface cracks that are deeper than a minimum crack depth threshold and that are longer than a minimum crack length threshold based on the track elevation map. The method may further include the step of saving data corresponding to the measured surface cracks to the data storage apparatus on a per tie basis so that the same tie can be re-examined at a later date to determine whether the measured surface cracks have changed. The method may further include a step of assigning a severity value to each measured crack based on at least the measured length and measured width of the crack.
The method described above may further include the step of identifying and measuring a surface feature that is higher than a minimum tie height threshold. The method may further include the step of saving data corresponding to the measured surface feature to the data storage apparatus on a per tie basis so that the same tie can be re-examined at a later date to determine whether the measured surface feature has changed.
The method described above may further include the step of detecting a broken tie based on an abrupt elevation shift along the tie surface plane.
The method described above may further include the step of determining a shoulder ballast volume adjacent a tie based at least in part on the approximate tie surface plane defined for the tie. The method may further include the step of defining a surface area region adjacent the tie bounding box, measuring the surface elevation of the surface area region, and determining the difference between the surface elevation of the surface area region and the surface elevation of the approximate tie surface plane to determine whether a positive volume or negative volume is present at the surface area region.
The method described above may further include the step of making a plurality of elevation measurements along and around an identified railway track bed feature and recording the measurements and the locations of the measurements in the data storage apparatus. The method may further include the step of assigning a condition to the identified railway track bed feature based on the plurality of elevation measurements.
The summary provided herein is intended to provide examples of particular disclosed embodiments and is not intended to limit the scope of the invention disclosure in any way.
Further features, aspects, and advantages of the present disclosure will become better understood by reference to the following detailed description, appended claims, and accompanying figures, wherein elements are not to scale so as to more clearly show the details, wherein like reference numbers indicate like elements throughout the several views, and wherein:
The figures are provided to illustrate concepts of the invention disclosure and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention disclosure to the exact embodiments provided in the figures.
Various terms used herein are intended to have particular meanings. Some of these terms are defined below for the purpose of clarity. The definitions given below are meant to cover all forms of the words being defined (e.g., singular, plural, present tense, past tense). If the definition of any term below diverges from the commonly understood and/or dictionary definition of such term, the definitions below control.
“Track”, “Railway track”, “track bed” or “railway track bed” is defined herein to mean a section of railway including the rails, ties, components holding the rails to the ties, components holding the rails together, and ballast material.
A “processor” is defined herein to include a processing unit including, for example, one or more microprocessors, an application-specific instruction-set processor, a network processor, a vector processor, a scalar processor, or any combination thereof, or any other control logic apparatus now known or later developed that is capable of performing the tasks described herein, or any combination thereof.
The phrase “in communication with” means that two or more devices are in communication with one another physically (e.g., by wire) or indirectly (e.g., by wireless communication).
Preferably, a first sensor 16A is used to detect reflected light along a first rail and a second sensor 16B is used to detect reflected light along a second rail. The data is then combined for both rails to provide a full elevation and intensity profile of the full width of a railway track bed as shown for example in
Following generation of full width 3D elevation maps, analysis including automated processing is completed to extract objective, repeatable, and accurate measures for detected features of interest. This analysis can be performed by the processor 12 or a separate processor separate from the system 10 by taking the data gathered by the system 10 and analyzing it. The identification of features is based on the definition and identification of unique 3D feature attributes of a railway track bed as discussed in more detail below. Track beds can be simplified as being comprised of rails, crossties (ties), ballast, and other track materials (OTM) and crossings. The 3DTAS analysis approach is preferably hierarchical, starting with the identification of the rails, rail features, ties, tie features, ballast, ballast features, and finally OTM and crossings.
From a 3D perspective, rails include rail heads 22 (normally the highest elevation in the track bed structure), joint bars 24 (for jointed rail sections of track), and the rail base 26 as shown for example in
The methodology for the identification of the rail head 22 is based on the detection of significant (large vertical component) longitudinal edges over a 2D area. In the case of the 3DTAS methodology, a detected 3D gradient magnitude for a given area must exceed a minimum rail height threshold (height of the detected edge above a calculated tie plane surface 28 as shown for example in
Calculation of the 3D gradient and thresholding allows the unambiguous identification of rail head edges as track features located above the calculated tie plane surface 28 having elevation gradients greater than a minimum height, preferably, 100 mm. Left and right edge targets are identified for both rails such that a first left rail edge 34A and a second left rail edge 34B is identified for a left rail 36 and a first right rail edge 38A and a second right rail edge 38B is identified for a right rail 40. This 3D gradient approach can be affected by atypical vertical component conditions such as foliage, track bed debris, and high ballast. The rail edge targets with suitable vertical gradients are preferably analyzed to identify outliers and eliminate those targets which are not located in valid rail edge lateral positions (based on defined rail head dimensions for example) and are not collinear with other edge targets. This method of robust rail head edge detection is able to correctly identify rail head edges regardless of lateral shifts in rail edge targets due to transverse test/survey vehicle movements during surveys (due to wide rail gauge or super elevated or curved sections of track for example). In cases in which a rail head edge is not detected, gaps in the detected rail head edges can be approximated using the valid edge measures before and after the missing segment and/or as a calculated offset from the edge on the opposite side of the rail head if the opposite edge has been detected.
The processing steps for the 3DTAS rail head edge detection are provided in
Once the rail head edges have been located, the 3D gradient is then examined separately for the field and gage side of each rail head. The valid field and gage rail base search areas are defined based on pre-defined distance offsets from the corresponding rail head edge locations. The search areas include a left rail field side base area 66, a left rail gage side base area 68, a right rail field side base area 70 and a right rail gage side based area 72 as shown in
This 3D gradient approach is affected by areas with insufficient gradients such as locations with ties beneath the rail base, and atypical conditions such as foliage, track bed debris, and high ballast. The rail base targets with suitable vertical gradients are preferably analyzed to identify outliers and eliminate those targets which are not located in valid rail base edge lateral positions (based on defined rail base dimensions for example) and are not collinear with other base edge targets. This method of robust rail base edge detection is able to correctly identify rail base edges regardless of lateral shifts in base edge targets due to transverse test/survey vehicle movements during surveys (due to wide rail gauge or super elevated or curved sections of track for example) or changes in rail type or dimensions. In cases in which a rail base edge is not detected, gaps in the detected base edges can be approximated using the valid edge measures before and after the missing segment and/or as a calculated offset from the edge on the opposite side of the rail base if the opposite edge has been detected.
In order for smaller features along a railway track bed to be more easily detected and categorized, it is preferable to remove rail head features from the 3D elevation maps. As such, using a processor such as, for example, the processor 12 of the system 10, the 3DTAS 3D analysis methodology preferably removes rail web and rail head elevation data to enhance 3D feature detection capabilities. By artificially (mathematically) eliminating the rail head component from the 3D track bed elevation maps, the 3D detection of the remaining smaller vertical components is enhanced. Large vertical dimension components tend to mask smaller features in close proximity. In the case of fastening systems, rail base welds, and anchors, elimination of the rail head is paramount for correct feature detection. This approach provides a significant performance improvement in the reliable detection of all other track bed 3D features of interest.
The rail head elimination process is detailed in
A rail base zone 118 as highlighted, for example, in
Flat surface regions are a typical characteristic of constructed materials including many components of interest found in railway track beds. The ability to identify planar regions is required for manmade feature identification and classification. The 3DTAS post-processing system uses a sophisticated approach to the identification of planar surfaces including calculating the magnitude of a vertical surface normal component from a 3D surface gradient acquired from 3D elevation data. The 3D gradient quantifies the variations in the surface elevation within a sliding neighborhood for an entire surface elevation map. In the example analysis included here, the localized 2D neighborhood over which the gradient is calculated is 5 mm transverse×15 mm longitudinal. Localized deviations in surface elevations produce significant variations in localized gradient values, which produce low vertical surface normal values. Planar regions produce insignificant vertical gradient variations which results in significant or large vertical surface normal values.
Calculating vertical surface normal values allows the efficient differentiation between manmade features and natural features of a track bed 3D surface elevation map. In particular this method effectively differentiates between the natural ballast stone and ties, plates and rails.
The planar region analysis described herein consolidates all significant regions (i.e., regions with greater than a minimum surface area threshold) with high surface normal values (i.e., surface normal values greater than a planar region surface normal threshold) that are in close proximity to one another (i.e., less than a maximum proximity threshold). Large consolidated planar regions 150 are shown, for example, in
The surface plane closely approximates a new tie surface and the planar approximation is used to identify other track features and calculate parameters of interest. These features include tie bounding box definitions (including tie physical dimensions such as length, width and skew angles), fastening systems, and tie condition. To acquire a tie bounding box definition the consolidated planar regions are preferably combined with the surface plane approximation shown in
Following planar region analysis, the calculation of a tie surface plane approximation and the definition of a tie bounding box, a detailed tie condition analysis is possible. The 3DTAS 3D tie condition assessment uses 3D deviations from an as-new tie condition estimate to objectively and accurately quantify and assess the current condition of a tie.
Given a 3D elevation map for a section of track bed 190 (as shown for example in
Each detected crack is analyzed for all 3D surface elevation points below the tie surface. Information recorded for each crack feature includes surface area (the area defined by the number of connected surface elevation measurement points forming the crack in its entirety), crack depth (min, max, mean and median deviation from the estimated tie surface plane to the depth at each crack measurement point), crack length (measured along the path of the crack), crack width (min, max, mean and median crack width for all points along the length of the crack), crack orientation (start point, end point, and the straight line approximation for the crack), and the crack location (defined by where on the crosstie the crack occurs; for example on either tie end, or the tie center between the rails). These parameters are used to establish an accurate and objective severity and extent distress measures for each crack. The severity determination includes additional rules for penalizing end break cracks, and orientations which pass through spike locations (and further penalizes if the affected spike height is above a nominal height threshold representing an unseated or elevated spike head). Crack severity is further increased if a crack extends from a tie end under the tie plate to the center section of the tie.
The tie surface plane 192 is also employed to identify end breaks 200 (missing portions of tie ends as shown for example in
A tie distress detection method flowchart is shown in
In a preferred embodiment, a 3DTAS system 242 includes a processor 244, a data storage apparatus 246 in communication with the processor, one or more computer programs 248 stored on a computer-readable medium 250, and a 3D feature library 252 stored on the computer-readable medium 250 as shown schematically in
The 3DTAS 3D feature identification system described herein limits the primary feature search to target areas centered along each of the rails. These zones preferably represent rail fastener locations. Using the processor 244, each appropriate 3D feature from the 3DTAS feature library 252 is automatically template matched against an entire surface elevation map for the applicable region of the track bed. An objective cross-correlation coefficient is determined for the entire tested surface area. Each area is tested in turn, and the highest normalized cross-correlation value at each location on the track surface for each library feature determines the identity of the feature. There is a minimum correlation threshold which must be exceeded for any target to be identified and classified as a specific rail feature.
An example of the 3D model matching for a section of track is shown in
The 3DTAS feature identification system was applied to the track bed example shown in
A tie fastener and anchor detection method flow chart is shown in
The 3D track surface elevation data is also used to define ballast profile measurements for both the shoulder and on the leading and following edges for each tie following the determination of individual tie bounding boxes. The 3DTAS is capable of calculating and reporting shoulder volumes at any client specified distance interval along a track bed (max, min, mean volumes per mile for example) as shown, for example, in
The detailed processing steps for the shoulder volume calculation methodology is provided in
A similar approach is used to calculate the up chainage (leading)/down chainage (trailing) tie edge volumes, based on ballast regions offset from each tie bounding box. The 3DTAS defines surface area regions adjacent to each tie bounding box that are used to calculate ballast volumes. Such volumes include leading edge volume 408, trailing edge volume 410, left shoulder volume 412 and right shoulder volume 414. These volumes are defined in part by a set tie trailing edge width 416, a tie leading edge width 417, a tie left shoulder width 418 and a tie right shoulder width 419. These volumes are also defined in part by a left tie field length 420, a tie center length 421, and a tie right field length 422. These volumes are calculated as the difference between the measured surface elevation for each of the defined ballast volume regions and the surface plane calculated from the surface of each tie (shown in
Another feature critical to the stability of railway track beds is the integrity of the crosstie to ballast interface. High quality ballast, adequately tamped (compacted) and placed at the correct levels, effectively transfers both vertical and lateral loads to the track bed sub-structure. Areas with insufficient ballast in the crib and shoulder areas represent areas with the potential for diminished track stability and are of interest to railway owners and operators.
Following the identification of tie planar surface regions, and the corresponding definition of individual crosstie bounding boxes, the track bed surface can be segmented into crosstie region 454, crib ballast region 456 and shoulder ballast region 458 as shown in
The inter-crosstie volume is defined as the difference between a plane calculated from the leading and trailing crosstie surfaces (shaded surface 466 in
The left and right shoulder volumes are calculated as individual cells 468 for the field region of the track bed beyond the ends of the crossties, with any specified fixed longitudinal calculation and reporting distance defined by the 3DTAS shoulder ballast volume distance parameter (0.6 meter for example). The shoulder volume surface area cell size is defined by the maximum track bed profile measurement width and the crosstie length (defining the cell width). The shoulder volumes are calculated as the difference between the tie surface planes with the tie bounding boxes extended to the end of the field side scan regions and the surface elevation of the shoulder ballast in each shoulder cell (shown as the alternating shaded regions in
The calculated ballast volume parameters for each shoulder cell 468 and inter-crosstie (crib) region 456 are reported based on track position and corresponding nearest proximity tie. Crib volumes, leading and trailing edge volumes and tie skew angles are analyzed and exceptions are reported. Exceptions include significant volume differences between leading and trailing volumes and high skew angles. The exceptional volume differences are defined by exceeding a 3DTAS volume difference threshold.
The detailed processing steps for ballast volume calculations for the region between and at the ends of each tie are detailed in the flowchart shown in
Following the 3D analysis and identification of all rail fastening systems for a given section of railway track bed, the results of the identification process provide the accurate position of every track fastening component. Once a fastener location is known, the 3DTAS is able to extract elevation measurements in small regions relative to the geometric center of each fastener. An example of a number of relative offset measurement regions (21 measurement regions identified by # and a numeral) for a Safelok III fastener 500 is shown in
Critical measures for the safe operation of a concrete crosstie based track system include broken or missing fasteners, fastener insulator wear, pad wear and rail seat abrasion. With the ability for accurate and repeatable elevation measures at any arbitrary location referenced to a fastener, all of these critical measures are possible.
Using the plurality of neighborhood based elevation measures in close proximity to each detected fastener allows the calculation of a variety of track infrastructure measures critical for effective and safe operation of the railway. Although the actual measurement points (relative to the center of each fastener) will vary for different fastener types, the elevation parameters measured remain the same. For example, for concrete ties these elevation parameters include; Top of Tie Elevation (
Rail Pad Thickness=mean(ElevE,ElevF)−mean(ElevA,ElevB,ElevC)−Rail Base Thickness
When the Rail Pad Thickness measure diminishes to 0, the bottom of the rail base is in direct contact with the Top of Tie, allowing Rail Seat Abrasion to occur. Therefore, Rail Seat Abrasion is reported when Rail Pad Thickness is equal to or less than zero using the following calculation;
Rail Seat Abrasion=ABS(mean(ElevE,ElevF)−mean(ElevA,ElevB,ElevC)−Rail Base Thickness)
Insulator wear, occurring as the insulator pad installed under the toe of the concrete tie fastener clips wears due to traffic loading and longitudinal rail movements, can be monitored through the measurement of the elevation difference between the Top of the Fastener and the Top of the Rail Base. The Insulator Thickness can be determined, for example, by using the following calculation;
Insulator Thickness=mean(ElevG,ElevH)−mean(ElevE,ElevF)−Fastener Toe Thickness
The detailed processing steps for determining pad thickness, rail seat abrasion, and insulator thickness are detailed in the flowchart shown in
Rail anchors 544 are an integral part of crosstie fastening systems as shown in
A joint bar is a metal bar that is bolted to the ends of two rails to join them together in a track. In continuously welded rail (CWR) joints and therefore joint bars, can represent repaired locations of interest to rail operators and owners. The 3DTAS exploits the physical topographical characteristics of joint bars and their placement to identify these 3D features. The 3DTAS method for identifying joint bars detects features in close proximity to the rail head edges which appear at an elevation between the rail base and the top of railhead. The method further requires that the joint bars have a longitudinal length greater than a minimum joint bar length threshold and less than a maximum joint bar length threshold. Once detected, the joint bar analysis method verifies the presence of joint bar components on both the field and gage sides of the rail, identifies any detectable bolt/nut features (e.g., to develop bolt counts or account for missing bolts).
3DTAS surface elevation data for a typical joint bar 600 is shown in
The detailed joint bar and rail joint detection and processing steps are detailed in
Like Rail Seat Abrasion for concrete ties, rail plate damage to wooden crossties through crosstie surface abrasion due to applied loads is a significant form of distress negatively impacting rail fastener holding capabilities and therefore tie condition. Following the identification of wooden tie fastening components (Spikes and Plate Holes) using 3D Template Matching methods, the 3DTAS uses the template correlation maps for Spike and Hole targets locations to match the fasteners with the correct crosstie Plate model in the 3D Feature Libraries. The detailed wooden crosstie plate detection and processing steps are detailed in
As shown in
The foregoing description of preferred embodiments of the present disclosure has been presented for purposes of illustration and description. The described preferred embodiments are not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the scope of the disclosure to the precise form(s) disclosed. Obvious modifications or variations are possible in light of the above teachings. The embodiments are chosen and described in an effort to provide the best illustrations of the principles of the disclosure and its practical application, and to thereby enable one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the concepts revealed in the disclosure in various embodiments and with various modifications as are suited to the particular use contemplated. All such modifications and variations are within the scope of the disclosure as determined by the appended claims when interpreted in accordance with the breadth to which they are fairly, legally, and equitably entitled.
This application is a continuation application claiming priority to U.S. Nonprovisional patent application Ser. No. 14/725,490 entitled “3D TRACK ASSESSMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD” which was filed on May 29, 2015 which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/118,600 entitled “3D Track Assessment System Post-Processing, Analysis and Reporting System” which was filed on Feb. 20, 2015, the entireties of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4781060 | Berndt | Nov 1988 | A |
4899296 | Khattak | Feb 1990 | A |
5221044 | Guins | Jun 1993 | A |
5247338 | Danneskiold-Samsoe et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5433111 | Hershey et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5787815 | Andersson et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5793492 | Vanaki | Aug 1998 | A |
6357297 | Makino et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6416020 | Gronskov | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6496254 | Bostrom | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6523411 | Mian et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6698279 | Stevenson | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6768551 | Mian et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6862936 | Kenderian et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6873998 | Dorum | Mar 2005 | B1 |
7034272 | Leonard | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7084989 | Johannesson et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7208733 | Mian et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7213789 | Matzan | May 2007 | B1 |
7298548 | Mian | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7355508 | Mian et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7357326 | Hattersley et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7392117 | Bilodeau et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
7412899 | Mian et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7502670 | Harrison | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7555954 | Pagano et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7564569 | Mian et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7602937 | Mian et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7698028 | Bilodeau et al. | Apr 2010 | B1 |
7832281 | Mian et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7869909 | Harrison | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7899207 | Mian et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
8006559 | Mian et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8079274 | Mian et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8111387 | Douglas et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8140250 | Mian et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8150105 | Mian et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8155809 | Bilodeau et al. | Apr 2012 | B1 |
8188430 | Mian | May 2012 | B2 |
8263953 | Fomenkar et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8289526 | Kilian et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8326582 | Mian et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8335606 | Mian et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8423240 | Mian | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8478480 | Mian et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8490887 | Jones | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8649932 | Mian et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8655540 | Mian et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8700924 | Mian et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8868291 | Mian et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8925873 | Gamache et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
9121747 | Mian et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9134185 | Mian et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9222904 | Harrison | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9310340 | Mian et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9340219 | Gamache et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9415784 | Bartonek et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9454816 | Mian et al. | Sep 2016 | B2 |
9518947 | Bartonek et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9571796 | Mian et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9664567 | Sivathanu et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
9689760 | Lanza di Scalea et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9714043 | Mian et al. | Jul 2017 | B2 |
9825662 | Mian et al. | Nov 2017 | B2 |
9922416 | Mian et al. | Mar 2018 | B2 |
9989498 | Lanza di Scalea et al. | Jun 2018 | B2 |
10167003 | Bilodeau | Jan 2019 | B1 |
10352831 | Kondo et al. | Jul 2019 | B2 |
10414416 | Hampapur | Sep 2019 | B2 |
20030072001 | Mian et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20040247157 | Lages | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20070265780 | Kesler et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080177507 | Mian et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20110064273 | Zarembski et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20120245908 | Berggren | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120263342 | Haas | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120300060 | Farritor | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20130096739 | Landes | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130191070 | Kainer | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130313372 | Gamache et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140129154 | Cooper | May 2014 | A1 |
20140177656 | Mian et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140333771 | Mian et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140339374 | Mian et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20150284912 | Delmonic et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20160282108 | Martinod Restrepo et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160321513 | Mitti et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160325767 | LeFabvre et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20170106887 | Mian et al. | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20180222504 | Birch et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180339720 | Singh | Nov 2018 | A1 |
20190039633 | Li | Feb 2019 | A1 |
20190135315 | Dargy et al. | May 2019 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2061014 | Aug 1992 | CA |
2574428 | Feb 2006 | CA |
2607634 | Apr 2008 | CA |
2574428 | Oct 2009 | CA |
2782341 | Jun 2011 | CA |
2867560 | Apr 2015 | CA |
2607634 | Jun 2015 | CA |
2945614 | Oct 2015 | CA |
2867560 | Jul 2017 | CA |
19831176 | Jan 2000 | DE |
19831215 | Jan 2000 | DE |
19826422 | Sep 2002 | DE |
19943744 | Jan 2006 | DE |
19919604 | Aug 2009 | DE |
102009018036 | Feb 2014 | DE |
102014119056 | Jun 2016 | DE |
1197417 | Apr 2002 | EP |
1098803 | Jan 2003 | EP |
1918702 | May 2008 | EP |
2697738 | Aug 2017 | EP |
269773861 | Aug 2017 | EP |
3077553 | Feb 2018 | FR |
3077553 | Aug 2019 | FR |
2383635 | Jun 2005 | GB |
2010229642 | Oct 2010 | JP |
2016191264 | Nov 2016 | JP |
6068012 | Jan 2017 | JP |
6192717 | Sep 2017 | JP |
6425990 | Nov 2018 | JP |
2019065650 | Apr 2019 | JP |
6530979 | Jun 2019 | JP |
200005576 | Feb 2000 | WO |
200008459 | Feb 2000 | WO |
2000-73118 | Dec 2000 | WO |
2001066401 | Sep 2001 | WO |
2001066401 | May 2003 | WO |
2005036199 | Apr 2005 | WO |
2005036199 | Apr 2005 | WO |
2006014893 | Feb 2006 | WO |
2012142548 | Oct 2012 | WO |
2013177393 | Nov 2013 | WO |
2015160300 | Oct 2015 | WO |
2015165560 | Nov 2015 | WO |
2016008201 | Jan 2016 | WO |
2016027072 | Feb 2016 | WO |
2019023613 | Jan 2019 | WO |
2019023658 | Jan 2019 | WO |
2019023613 | Jan 2019 | WO |
2019023658 | Jan 2019 | WO |
Entry |
---|
T. Kanade, ed., Three-Dimensional Machine Vision, Kluwer Academic Publishers (1987) [Part 1]. |
T. Kanade, ed., Three-Dimensional Machine Vision, Kluwer Academic Publishers (1987) [Part 2]. |
D.D. Davis et al., “Tie Condition Inspection a Case Study of Tie Failure Rate, Mods, and Clustering,” Report No. R-714, Association of American Railroads Research and Test Department (Jul. 1989). |
John Choros et al., “Prevention of Derailments due to Concrete Tie Rail Seat Deterioration,” Proceedings of ASME/IEEE Joint Rail Conference & Internal Combustion Engine Spring Technical Conference. No. 40096 (2007). |
Korean Intellectual Property Office, International Search Report for Int. App. No. PCT/IB2018/058574 dated Feb. 27, 2019. |
Korean Intellectual Property Office, Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for Int. App. No. PCT/IB2018/058574 dated Feb. 27, 2019. |
US Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/127,956 dated Dec. 31, 2018. |
D.D. Davis et al., “Tie Performance—A Progress Report of the Des Plaines Test Site,” Report No. R-746, Association of American Railroads Research and Test Department (Apr. 1990). |
Mattias Johanneson, “Architectures for Sheet-of-Light Range Imaging,” Report No. LiTH-ISY-I-1335, Image Processing Group, Department of Electrical Engineering, Linköping University (Feb. 27, 1992). |
U.S. Appl. No. 60/584,769, “System & Method for Inspecting Railroad Track” by John Nagle & Steven C. Orrell. |
Mattias Johannesson, “Sheet-of-light Range Imaging,” Linköping Studies in Science and Technology. Dissertations No. 399 (1995). |
M. Johannesson, SIMD Architectures for Range and Radar Imaging, PhD thesis, University of Linköping (1995). |
Erik Åstrand, “Automatic Inspection of Sawn Wood,” Linköping Studies in Science and Technology. Dissertations. No. 424 (1996). |
Mattias Johannesson, “Sheet-of-Light range imaging experiments with MAPP2200,” Report No. LiTH-ISY-I-1401, Image Processing Group, Department of Electrical Engineering, Linköping University (Sep. 28, 1992). |
M. de Bakker et al., “A Smart Range Image Sensor,” Proceedings of the 24th European Solid-State Circuits Conference (1998):208-11;xii-+514. |
Dr. Mats Gokstorp et al., “Smart Vision Sensors,” International Conference on Image Processing (Oct. 4-7, 1998), Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. |
Mattias Johanneson, et al., “An Image Sensor for Sheet-of-Light Range Imaging,” IAPR Workshop on Machine Vision Applications (Dec. 7-9, 1992). |
Mattias Johannesson, “Can Sorting using sheet-of-light range imaging and MAPP2200,” Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (Oct. 17-20, 1993). |
Michiel de Bakker, et al., “Smart PSD array for sheet-of-light range imaging,” The International Society for Optical Engineering. Sensors and Camera Systems for Scientific, Industrial, and Digital Photography Applications (Jan. 24-26, 2000). |
Umayal Chidambaram, “Edge Extraction of Color and Range Images,” (Dec. 2003). |
Franz Pernkopf et al., “Detection of surface defects on raw milled steel blocks using range imaging” The International Society for Optical Engineering. Machine Vision Applications in Industrial Inspection X (Jan. 21-22, 2002). |
Murhed, Anders, “IVP Integrated Vision Products,” Pulp and Paper International 44.12 (Dec. 1, 2002). |
Anders Åstrand, “Smart Image Sensors,” Linköping Studies in Science and Technology. Dissertations. No. 319 (1993). |
Mattias Johannesson et al., “Five Contributions to the Art of Sheet-of-light Range Imaging on MAPP2200,” Report No. LiTH-ISY-R-1611, Image Processing Group, Department of Electrical Engineering, Linköping University (Apr. 14, 1994). |
Federal Register, vol. 73 (70695-70696). |
Newman et al., “A Survey of Automated Visual Inspection,” Computer Vision an Image Understanding vol. 61, No. 2, Mar., pp. 231-262, 1995. |
J. Velten et al., “Application of a Brightness-Adapted Edge Detector for Real-Time Railroad Tie Detection in Video Images,” Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (1999). |
R. Gordon Kennedy, “Problems of Cartographic Design in Geographic Information Systems for Transportation,” Cartographic Perspectives (Jul. 20, 1999). |
Richard Reiff, “An Evaluation of Remediation Techniques for Concrete Tie Rail Seat Abrasion in the Fast Environment,” American Railway Engineering Association, Bulletin 753 (1995). |
Russell H. Lutch et al., “Causes and Preventative Methods for Rail Seat Abrasion in North America's Railroads,” Conference Paper (Oct. 2014). |
Nigel Peters and Steven R. Mattson, “CN 60E Concrete Tie Development,” AREMA: 25 (2003). |
Federal Register, vol. 76, No. 175, pp. 55819-55825. |
National Transportation Safety Board, “Railroad Accident Brief” (NTSB/RAB-06/03). |
Arthur L. Clouse et al. “Track Inspection Into the 21st Century” (Sep. 19, 2006). |
Federal Register, vol. 76, No. 63, pp. 18001-18346 (18073). |
Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC), Minutes of Meeting, Dec. 10, 2008, Washington, D.C. |
Dennis P. Curtin, “An Extension to the Textbook of Digital Photography, Pixels and Images” (2007). |
Holland L.P.'s Combined Motion for Early Markman Claim Construction and Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement in Georgetown Rail Equipment Company v. Holland L.P., (E.D. Tex.) (Tyler) (6:13-cv-366). |
Georgetown Rail Equipment Company's Response to Holland L.P.'s Combined Motion for Early Markman Claim Construction and Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement in Georgetown Rail Equipment Company v. Holland L.P., (E.D. Tex.) (Tyler) (6:13-cv-366). |
Georgetown Rail Equipment Company's P.R. 4-5(a) Opening Markman Claim Construction Brief in Georgetown Rail Equipment Company v. Holland L.P., (E.D. Tex.) (Tyler) (6:13-cv-366). |
Holland L.P.'s Responsive Markman Claim Construction Brief Under P.R. 4-5 in Georgetown Rail Equipment Company v. Holland L.P., (E.D. Tex.) (Tyler) (6:13-cv-366). |
Claim Construction Memorandum Opinion and Order in Georgetown Rail Equipment Company v. Holland L.P., (E.D. Tex) (Tyler) (6:13-cv-366). |
Public Judgment and Reasons in Georgetown Rail Equipment Company v. Rail Radar Inc. and Tetra Tech EBA Inc. (T-896-15) (2018 FC 70). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190349566 A1 | Nov 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62118600 | Feb 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 14725490 | May 2015 | US |
Child | 16516722 | US |