1. Field of the Invention
The invention relates to railroads generally, and more particularly to a method and system for detecting when an end of train passes a point such as a mile marker, switch, siding or other location of interest.
2. Discussion of the Background
It is often important to be able to determine that a railroad has passed a particular point in a railroad. For example, in a train control method known as Track Warrant Control (TWC), a railroad is divided into sections referred to as blocks and a dispatcher gives each train warrants, or authorities, to occupy and/or move in one or more blocks. The blocks are usually (but not necessarily) fixed, with block boundaries usually (but not necessarily) being identified with physical locations on the railroad such as mileposts, sidings, and switches. In this system, a train in a first block (or group of blocks) receives a warrant to occupy a second adjacent block (or group of blocks) from the dispatcher and informs the dispatcher when it has cleared the first block and has entered the following block. After the train notifies the dispatcher that the first block has been cleared, the dispatcher may issue an unrestricted (rather than a “joint” or “permissive” warrant) warrant to occupy the first block to a second train. If such a warrant to occupy the first block is issued to the second train before the end of the first train has cleared that block, a collision between the two trains may result. Therefore, determining that the end of the train has left a block is critical in a track warrant control system.
As another example, it may be necessary to wait until one train has passed a switch so that the switch position can be set in a different direction for a following train. There are yet other examples in which it is necessary to determine that an end of train has passed a point such as the end of a block.
Determining that an end of a train has passed a point is not a trivial process. Modern trains can be hundreds of yards long, and an engineer in the lead locomotive often cannot see the end of the train. Operating trains at night or during bad weather may also make visually determining that the end of a train has passed a point difficult or impossible. Thus, visual methods are not sufficient.
A second method used to determine that the end of a train has passed a point is to determine how far the head of the train has traveled past the point using a wheel tachometer/revolution counter or a positioning system (e.g., a GPS system). With this method, once the head of the train has traveled a distance equal to the length of the train past the point, it is assumed that the end of the train has passed the point. However, with this method, it is important to take into account the possibility that one or more end cars of a train may become uncoupled from the remainder of the train.
One way in which uncoupled cars can be detected is through the use of end-of-train, or EOT, devices equipped with motion detectors. These devices, which communicate via radio with the head of the train (HOT), provide an indication as to whether or not the end of the train is in motion. However, with these devices the motion sensors sometimes break or give false readings and, under certain circumstances, may mislead a conductor or engineer even when working properly. One potentially disastrous incident known to the inventors in which even a properly functioning motion detector can give a misleading indication involves a distributed power train. A distributed power train is a train comprising one or more locomotives placed at the front of the train, followed by one or more cars, followed by one or more additional locomotives and cars. In such a train, the throttles in the second group of locomotives are operated by remote control to be in the same position as the throttles in the first group.
In the above-referenced incident, a distributed power train was temporarily stopped at a crossing. While stopped, a vandal disconnected the second group of locomotives from the preceding car and closed off the valves in the air brake line (had these valves not been closed off, a failsafe mechanism would have activated the brakes to prevent the train from moving). In this particular distributed power train, the second group of cars connected to the second group of locomotives was heavier than the first group of cars connected to the first group of locomotives. Because the second group of cars was heavier than the first, there was a difference in speed between the two portions of the train when the train began moving after being uncoupled by the vandal, and the first portion of the train began to separate from the second portion. The EOT motion sensor transmitted the correct status that the EOT (last car) was moving, but did not (indeed, could not) indicate the train was separated. In this incident, the separation grew to over a mile before the engineer noticed that there was a problem.
If the engineer on this train had relied on the distance traveled by the head of the train to report to the dispatcher that the end of the train had cleared the previous block, then an extremely dangerous situation would have resulted in that the end of the separated train would still have been in the previous block where an oncoming train might have collided with it. Thus, any method used to determine that the end of the train has passed a point should take into account the possibility that the end of the train may have become separated from the head of the train.
One method for detecting that a train has passed a point is discussed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,081,769. In this method, discussed at col. 4, lines 49-67, a second GPS receiver is placed on the end of the train and the position reported by that receiver is used to determine that the end of the train has passed the point of interest. This patent also discloses that the difference in position reported by the first and second GPS receivers can be used to determine the length of the train.
The present invention determines that an end of train has passed a point through the use of positioning systems located at the head of the train and the end of the train. In a first method, a control unit will obtain the train's position at a point of interest (e.g., a switch or block boundary) from the HOT positioning system. The control unit will then determine when the train has traveled a distance equal to the length of the train. This can be done either by integrating successive reports from the positioning system (that is, determining a difference in position between successive reports and adding the differences to determine a total distance), or by periodically determining a distance between the position of the point of interest and the position reported by the positioning system until such time as the distance is greater than the length of the train. When the distance traveled by the head of the train equals or exceeds the length of the train, the control unit will interrogate the positioning system at the end of the train. If the difference between this position and the position reported by the head-of-train positioning system at the point of interest exceeds a threshold, then the end of the train has passed the point. While it is possible to set the threshold to zero, the threshold is chosen to include a safety factor to account for, among other things, positioning system errors. As an additional check, the speeds reported by the end-of-train and head-of-train positioning systems can be compared to verify that the difference in speeds is approximately zero (a small difference is preferably allowed to account for positioning system errors and slack between cars which can allow the cars at the end of the train to have a slightly different speed as compared to the locomotive at the head of the train at any given moment).
In a second method, when the HOT positioning system reaches a point of interest, the position reported by the EOT positioning system is integrated until the total distance traveled by the end of the train equals the length of the train (again, a safety factor is preferably included). If the speed reported by the EOT positioning system matches (allowing for positioning system errors) the speed reported by the HOT positioning system when the integrated distance equals the length of the train, the end of the train has passed the point.
A more complete appreciation of the invention and many of the attendant features and advantages thereof will be readily obtained as the same become better understood by reference to the following detailed description when considered in connection with the accompanying drawings, wherein:
The present invention will be discussed with reference to preferred embodiments of the invention. Specific details, such as types of positioning systems and threshold distances, are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of the present invention. The preferred embodiments discussed herein should not be understood to limit the invention. Furthermore, for ease of understanding, certain method steps are delineated as separate steps; however, these steps should not be construed as necessarily distinct nor order dependent in their performance.
Referring now to the drawings, wherein like reference numerals designate identical or corresponding parts throughout the several views,
A head of train positioning system 120 and an end of train positioning system 130 are connected to the control module 110. The positioning systems supply the position and, preferably, the speed of the train to the control module 110. The positioning systems 120, 130 can be of any type, including global positioning systems (GPS), differential GPSs, inertial navigation systems (INS), or Loran systems. Such positioning systems are well known in the art and will not be discussed in further detail herein. (As used herein, the term “positioning system” refers to the portion of a positioning system that is commonly located on a mobile vehicle, which may or may not comprise the entire system. Thus, for example, in connection with a global positioning system, the term “positioning system” as used herein refers to a GPS receiver and does not include the satellites that transmit information to the GPS receiver.)
A map database 140 is also connected to the control module 110. The map database 130 preferably comprises a non-volatile memory such as a hard disk, flash memory, CD-ROM or other storage device, on which map data is stored. Other types of memory, including volatile memory, may also be used. The map data preferably includes positions of all points of interest such as block boundaries, switches, sidings, etc. The map data preferably also includes information concerning the direction and grade of the track in the railway. By using train position information obtained from the positioning systems 120, 130 and information from the map database 140, the control module 110 can determine its position relative to points of interest.
Some embodiments of the invention also include a transceiver 150 connected to the control module 110 for communicating with a dispatcher 160. The transceiver 150 can be configured for any type of communication, including communication through rails and wireless communication.
Also connected to the control module 110 in some embodiments of the invention is a warning device 170. The warning device 170 is used to alert the operator to a possible error condition such as the separation of the EOT from the HOT. The warning device 170 may comprise audible warning devices such as horns and beepers and/or visual warning devices such as lights or alphanumeric and graphic displays.
When the HOT has reached the point of interest at step 214, the control module then delays for a short period of time (e.g., 1 second) at step 215 and obtains the current HOT position from the HOT positioning system 120 at step 216. This position is compared with the HOT position at the point of interest at step 218. If the difference is not greater than a length of train threshold at step 220, step 216 is repeated. The length of train threshold includes the length of the train and, preferably, a safety factor to account for positioning system errors. The length of the train may be reported to the control module 110 by the dispatcher, or the dispatcher's computer, may be entered manually by the operator, or may be determined using any other method, including the methods disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,081,769 and 6,311,109.
If the distance traveled by the HOT exceeds the length of the train at step 220, the position of the end of the train as reported by EOT positioning system 130 is obtained at step 222. This position is compared to the position obtained (at step 212) from the HOT positioning system at the point of interest at step 224. If this difference does not exceed a threshold at step 226, step 222 is repeated. The threshold utilized in step 226 is nominally zero but preferably includes a safety margin to account for positioning system errors.
If the difference exceeds the threshold at step 226 (signifying that the end of the train has passed the point of interest), the speeds reported by the EOT and HOT positioning systems is compared at step 228. The purpose of this comparison is to ensure that the EOT and HOT are not traveling at significantly different speeds, which would be indicative of a train separation. If the difference in EOT and HOT speeds is greater than a threshold (again, nominally zero but preferably including a safety factor to account for differences in speed caused by slack between cars in train and positioning system errors) at step 230, then the control module 110 warns the operator of a possible train separation at step 232. If the difference in EOT and HOT speeds is less than the threshold at step 230, then the control module 110 reports (e.g., to the dispatcher 160 via the transceiver 150) that the end of the train has passed the point of interest at step 234.
Referring now to
When the HOT has reached the point of interest at step 406, the control module 110 then obtains the current EOT position from the EOT positioning system 130 and temporarily stores it at step 408. The control module 110 then delays a short period (e.g., 1 second). After the delay, the current EOT position is obtained at step 412, the difference between this position and the previously stored EOT position is calculated at step 414 and this difference is added to a total distance (the total distance that the EOT has traveled since the HOT passed the point of interest) at step 416. If the total distance is not greater than a length of train threshold at step 418, the current EOT positioned is stored at step 420 and steps 410 et seq. are repeated.
If the distance traveled by the EOT exceeds the length of the train at step 418, the position of the end of the train as reported by EOT positioning system 130 is compared to the position obtained (at step 406) from the HOT positioning system at the point of interest at step 422. If this difference does not exceed a threshold at step 424, the current EOT position is again obtained at step 426 and step 422 is repeated. As above, the threshold utilized in step 424 may be zero but preferably includes a safety margin to account for positioning system errors.
If the difference exceeds the threshold at step 424 (signifying that the end of the train has passed the point of interest), the speeds reported by the EOT and HOT positioning systems are compared at step 428. The purpose of this comparison is to ensure that the EOT and HOT are not traveling at significantly different speeds, which would be indicative of a train separation. If the difference in EOT and HOT speeds is greater than a threshold (again, nominally zero but preferably including a safety factor to account for differences in speed caused by slack between cars in train and positioning system errors) at step 430, then the control module 110 warns the operator of a possible train separation at step 432. If the difference in EOT and HOT speeds is less than the threshold at step 430, then the control module 110 reports (e.g., to the dispatcher 160 via the transceiver 150) that the end of the train has passed the point of interest at step 434.
It should be noted that the comparison of speeds between the HOT and EOT positioning systems 120, 130, while preferable because it adds an additional degree of safety, is not strictly necessary.
Obviously, numerous modifications and variations of the present invention are possible in light of the above teachings. It is therefore to be understood that within the scope of the appended claims, the invention may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4181943 | Mercer, Sr. et al. | Jan 1980 | A |
4459668 | Inoue et al. | Jul 1984 | A |
4561057 | Haley, Jr. et al. | Dec 1985 | A |
4711418 | Aver, Jr. et al. | Dec 1987 | A |
4807127 | Tenmoku et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
5072900 | Malon | Dec 1991 | A |
5129605 | Burns et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5177685 | Davis et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
5332180 | Peterson et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5340062 | Heggestad | Aug 1994 | A |
5364047 | Petit et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5394333 | Kao | Feb 1995 | A |
5398894 | Pascoe | Mar 1995 | A |
5452870 | Heggestad | Sep 1995 | A |
5533695 | Heggestad et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5620155 | Michalek | Apr 1997 | A |
5699986 | Welk | Dec 1997 | A |
5740547 | Kull et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5751569 | Metel et al. | May 1998 | A |
5803411 | Ackerman et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5817934 | Skantar | Oct 1998 | A |
5828979 | Polivka et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5867122 | Zahm et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5890682 | Welk | Apr 1999 | A |
5944768 | Ito et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5950966 | Hungate et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5969643 | Curtis | Oct 1999 | A |
5978718 | Kull | Nov 1999 | A |
5995881 | Kull | Nov 1999 | A |
6008731 | Capan | Dec 1999 | A |
6049745 | Douglas et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6081769 | Curtis | Jun 2000 | A |
6102340 | Peek et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6112142 | Shockley et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6135396 | Whitfield et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6179252 | Roop et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6218961 | Gross et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6227625 | Gaughan | May 2001 | B1 |
6311109 | Hawthorne et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6322025 | Colbert et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6345233 | Erick | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6371416 | Hawthorne | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6373403 | Korver et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6374184 | Zahm et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6377877 | Doner | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6397147 | Whithead | May 2002 | B1 |
6421587 | Diana et al. | Jul 2002 | B2 |
6456937 | Doner et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6459964 | Vu et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6459965 | Polivka et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6480766 | Hawthorne et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
6487478 | Azzaro et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6609049 | Kane et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
20010056544 | Walker | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020070879 | Gazit et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20030225490 | Kane et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20040236482 A1 | Nov 2004 | US |