Date post: | 19-Jan-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | blake-preston |
View: | 220 times |
Download: | 0 times |
INTERFACING ETCS WITH LEGACY CC-SYSTEMS
TRACK - SIDE
2
NEED FOR MIGRATION
• Elimination of National Systems and their replacement with ETCS– In most cases coming to the end of their life cycle.
• Two different strategies:– All train first, then trackside straight to ETCS in a big – bang.– Trackside dual (or triple fitted) as an overlay, then gradual fitting of
trains.• Need to interface to National Systems.
• Need to replace or enhance the existing Signalling Systems
3
MIGRATION STRATEGIES
• GRADUAL MIGRATION – Maintain the existing ATP National System– Trains equipped with ETCS
• STM national system– Automatic switch over can be performed (national function)
• Full ATP national system– No Automatic switch over. Only under special design of dedicated
interface
GSM-R
EVC
ETCS-MMI
Radio NAT. EVC ETCS
N1 + N2
BTM LEVEL 2-
LEVEL 1
NATIONAL
4
MIGRATION STRATEGIES
• GRADUAL MIGRATION– It allows progressive ETCS implementation
• On board• Trackside
– ATP national system as a fall back during a period as desired– It allows a mixed traffic of equipped and non equipped trains– No need of special interface between ETCS/ATP track side
• Eurobalises for beginning and end of ETCS territory
Existing National System
ETCS L1 or L2
5
MIGRATION STRATEGIES
• Spanish experience– Trains equipped with ETCS L1 and L2 and complete independent
ASFA national system (no STM)
ASFA National System
ETCS L1
ETCS L2
6
INTERFACES
• Interfaces ETCS L1, L2 / existing signalling systems– Relay type interlockings– Line side signals– Electronic interlockings– CTC
• ETCS level 2/Level 1
RBC
EURO-BALISE
LEU
Interlocking
LEU
EURO-BALISE
7
INTERFACES
Compiler LTVs
Interlocking
LEU 1
LEU N
LEU 15
Balises LEU 1
BalisesLEU N
BalisesLEU 15
Local Operation ERTMS
local operation
System Aid Maintenance
ERTMSCentral Control
8
ETCS/SIGNALLING INTERFACES
• ETCS level 1 – Relay type interlocking/Track side elements
• LEU, discrete Interface with parallel inputs
• Direct wiring to any interlocking or signal aspects
• LEUs centralized at relay room (1)
• LEUs line side installed (2)• Relatively simple interface
• No LEUs interconnection• Max. speed determined by
line side signals• No centralized TSR´s
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
Interlocking
SI
GN
ALLA
MPS
I/F
1 2
9
INTERFACES
• ETCS level 1 – Relay type Interlocking– LEU Networked version
• TCP/IP suitable for fibre optic comms. links to interlocking and Control Centre
• Temporary Speed Restrictions direct from Control Centre
– Remote Maintenance and Diagnosis– Max. speed can be higher
4 Balises / LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEUs CONCENTRATOR
INTE
RLO
CKIN
G
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
TDM
PARA
LLEL
I/O
10
INTERFACES
• ETCS level 1 – Electronic Interlocking– LEU Networked version– Non standard interface
• Manufacturer's owned.
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEUs CONCENTRATOR
INTE
RLO
CKIN
G
LEU
LEU
LEU
LEU
TCP/IP
11
INTERFACES
• ETCS level 2 – Relay type Interlocking
RBC
Interlocking
VITAL PARALLEL INPUTS
TDM
• Safety Interface• Vital parallel I/O• Transmission Digital module• Serial vital comms protocol
• Non standard• Manufacturer's owned
• Technically feasible• Operationally not advisable
• Maintenance• Investment• Lifecycle
12
INTERFACES
• ETCS level 2 – Electronic Interlocking– Serial Interface– Vital communications protocol– Non standard interface
• Manufacturer's owned
SignallingLAN
RBC
INTE
RLO
CKIN
G
13
INTERFACES
• ETCS level 2 – Electronic IL. Spanish experience– Westrace comms protocol has been implemented into Alcatel´s
RBC in Spanish HS lines:• La Sagra – Toledo; Segovia – Valladolid; Lérida – Barcelona
– Invensys RBC comms protocol has been implemented into Alcatel´s Intersig interlocking in Córdoba – Málaga HS line
– Westrace comms protocol has been implemented into Siemens CBTC in L9 driverless Barcelona Metro
Interlocking protocol
RBC Interlocking
RBC protocol
RBC Interlocking
14
INTERFACES
• ETCS Level 2 – Level 2. Different manufacturers– RBC - RBC Safe Communication Interface is being specified
within UNISIG.
Signalling
LAN
RBC RBC
UNISIG SUBSET – 039. FIS for RBC - RBC handover.UNISIG SUBSET – 098. RBC – RBC Safe Comm. Interface.UNISIG SUBSET – 099. RBC – RBC Test specification for Safe Comm. I/F
15
INTERFACES
• ETCS level 2 – Level 1– Crossing from Level 2 to Level 1 is performed automatically on
board (national function)– Eurobalises marking the border of Levels 1 an 2
ETCS L1ETCS L2
16
INTERFACES
ETCS L1
ETCS L2
• ETCS level 2 – Level 1– L2 overlapping L1– L1 used as fallback system– Automatic switch over as national function
17
INTERFACES
• ETCS level 1 / level 2 - CTC
INTERLOCKINGCLC
hot stand by
LEU
Eurobalises
ETCS LEVEL 1 EQUIPMENT
ERTMS – CENTRAL EQUIPMENT
RBC
JRU
LOCALOPERATION
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 1
ETCS commsInterface
CTC ETCSCentral Control
ETCS comms protocolManufacturer's owned
SIL 2 comms
18
CONCLUSIONS
• GRADUAL MIGRATION – Maintain the existing ATP National System during migration period
• ETCS Level 1– Advantages
• Overlays existing signalling with minimal change• GSM-R not required• Interoperability now well proven• On-board is compatible with higher levels (add radio)
– Disadvantages• No capacity improvement (can be negative unless in-fill is fitted)• High Cost (Line side Electronic Unit + in-fill+ cabling)• Trackside does not migrate easily to higher levels
• ETCS Level 2 with SIGNALS– Advantages
• Overlays on existing train protection• Balises become fixed (no trackside electronics)
– Disadvantages• GSM-R is required • Radio coverage may need to be improved over voice
19
CONCLUSIONS
• ETCS Level 2 WITHOUT SIGNALS– Advantages
• Cab-signalling system with cost savings• Significant capacity increases through variable train detection sections
– Disadvantages• All trains need to be fitted• Radio based cab-signalling of this complexity is new to the mainline railway
industry• Fall back system requested?
– High density traffic lines– Low traffic lines
• Signalling Systems– Cost effective solutions/technical feasibility
• Gradual enhancement• Replacement