JPS58177767A - Control system of train - Google Patents

Abstract

(57) [Summary] This bulletin contains application data before electronic filing, so abstract data is not recorded.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION The present invention relates to a control system for trains running on a track, and particularly to a priority determination system for determining the order in which trains pass at mirror points.

In conventional train operation management systems, it is also difficult to determine the order in which trains pass at points where routes diverge, that is, at conflict points.
However, the decision logic was thought to change depending on the track type and train operation mode, and the decision logic was designed and programmed for each system and location.

The problems of the conventional method will be explained using FIG.

In the conventional system, when a train is traveling and reaches a predetermined point or a predetermined time has elapsed, the train issues a signal control request to change the signal from red to green. When a control request is issued, each train
Using a program determined for each train, it is determined whether a conflict point located inside the corresponding signal can be used. In Figure 1, for example, if train C, which has issued a control request, uses its own programs P and C to determine the interrelationship with trains A, B, and D, and determines that it has priority over all other trains. , using conflict points. Other trains A and B.

D also performs similar processing. In systems where signal control requests are issued at different times for each train, the track configuration is complex, there are many train types, and train operation patterns are diverse, it is extremely difficult to create programs that run independently to be consistent. It's difficult. Consistency here means that two conditions of first order are satisfied at all conflict points.

[However, when φ(R)≧2]・・・・・・・・・ 0
) Here, C(p, r, B is 1 if train r can use conflict point p at time t, otherwise 0. R is the set of trains related to conflict point p, n is logic The product and U represent the logical sum, and ≠(R) represents the number of constituent indexes of the set.

Condition (1) mentioned above is that one conflicting point is not used by two or more trains at the same time (avoidance of collision), and condition (2) is that all trains are not at the conflicting use time (one train is allowed to use it). to become).

An object of the present invention is to eliminate the need to change the program every time the track configuration or train operation configuration is changed.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a train control system that does not cause contradictions in the judgment logic even when the track configuration becomes complicated.

In order to achieve such an objective, the present invention.

By simply registering each train's current position and passing route in a table, the train passing order at competing points can be determined at once according to predetermined priority criteria, and the priority determination results can be referred to as conditions for permitting control of each signal. The feature is that the condition is satisfied if there is no train that has priority over cars.

Embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the drawings.

FIG. 2 shows an example of the overall configuration of the train operation management system according to the present invention, where 1 is a station, 2 is a data processing device, 3 is a program memory, 4 is a data memory, and 5 is a command device.

In the figure, the data processing device 2 includes a program memory 3
According to the program stored in the station, priority judgment processing is performed using signals 8G1 such as signals and track circuits sent from the station 1 and signals SG2 such as the planned timetable from the command device 5. The signal SGa is sent to the traffic lights.

FIG. 3 shows an overview of the operation of the train operation management system shown in FIG. 2.

In the figure, tracking information 8 is created in tracking processing 7 according to the status of traffic lights, trains, etc. of target process 6. In the priority determination process 9, a priority determination result 10 is created using the tracking information 8. In the route control process 11, which signal is to be controlled is determined by referring to the tracking information 8, the priority determination result IO, and the plan information (train schedule) 12, and the control output is input to the target process 6.

Specifically, the role of the tracking process 7 is to recognize which trains are at which locations and to pass the train positions to other processes that require them. In the tracking process 7, the status of the target process 1 is input and tracking information 8 is created. In more detail,
Divide the track into sections separated by signals and track circuits (continuous collections) that further divide sections, and calculate which sections and track circuits the train is on. Detection of train movement is performed using on/off track circuits and signal indications (blue/red). Train names are assigned based on a train name plan determined for each train generation, nine divisions, and merging locations.

The route control process 11 includes tracking information 8, priority determination results 10.
and the plan information (train schedule) 121, and checks the distortion force 1 to see if various conditions for turning the signal green are met, and if the conditions are met, outputs a control request for the corresponding signal to the target process 6. .

In the conventional system, route control processing and priority shutdown processing were not separated, and priority determination was activated during the course control condition check. In contrast, in the method of the present invention, priority determination result 10 is set as an interface between priority determination and route control processing, and route control only refers to the determination result rather than activating priority determination VFR. . It was a cabinet. Judgment results that are no longer needed due to the signal control output are deleted in the route control process.

For details on the tracking process, see, for example, "Standardization of Software Configuration of Train Operation Management System J p.275~
279. It is presented in the Proceedings of the 14th Domestic Symposium on the Use of Cybernetics in Railways (November 1977).

FIG. 4 is a diagram for explaining a priority determination method based on non-inventiveness.

In order to make a priority decision, you must first select the competitive points. A conflict point is a location along which a train must travel.

The criteria for selecting competing points is that "at least one of the locations (track circuit sections) shared by any two competing signals must be included." If there are two or more places that two traffic lights share, all of them may be used as conflict points, but in terms of processing amount, the fewer the number of conflict points is, the better, so the minimum number of places that are necessary can be used as conflict points. In the example in Figure 4, Q
Four locations, tsQ, = -Qs -Q4, are required.

Once the competitive points have been selected, the next step is to decide which trains should be judged. When deciding whether or not a certain train can use a certain conflict point, other trains that have a conflict relationship must also be considered. Since priority determination is performed on a station-by-station basis, a determination range is determined for each station, and trains existing within that range are subject to determination. In the example in Figure 4, the area inside the broken line is the judgment range, and 1 train A,
BC is eligible, but one train is not.

In this example, trains A and C compete at conflict point Q, and trains A and B compete at conflict point Q, so it is necessary to judge these two cases.

FIG. 5 is a skeleton flowchart showing a schematic procedure of priority determination processing performed by the data processing device 2 of FIG. Although this shows processing for only one station, the same processing is performed for each station.

In routine 21, trains to be prioritized in the relevant section are identified. As explained in FIG. 4, trains existing within a predetermined judgment range for each station are subject to judgment.

In routine 22, the signal train used by the train is determined from the plan (train diagram) of each train, and related conflict points are calculated.

In the example of FIG. 4, the traffic light row table showing the traffic light rows is as shown in FIG. 6. Train A uses signals St and Sm, train B uses signal S, '1, and train C uses signal S.

Related conflict points are registered in the conflict table shown in FIG. At this time, a traffic light-competition point correspondence table shown in FIG. 7 is used to show the relationship between traffic lights and competing points.

In the competition table, train A has a competition point of 9 due to signal S
．． 1 to one signal S, conflict point Q, train B to signal S4 to conflict point Q, one train C to signal 8. indicates that the contention point Q1 is used.

The routine 23 predicts and calculates the time each train will use the conflict point from the current position of the train and the plan.

The time calculation method will be explained using FIGS. 9 and 10.

There are two types of calculation methods depending on the control method of traffic lights related to conflict points. Competitive point Q of the 8 trains in Figure 9! When controlling a signal based on the approach of one train, as shown in Figure 10 (
As shown in a), the expected traffic light arrival time t is obtained by adding the numerator Al when traveling from the relevant point to the relevant traffic light 1 to the latest point passing time t1. This time 1. The control numerator A added for each traffic light from! The expected conflict point use start time t is obtained by subtracting . The control time numerator Al is a quantity indicating how long before the traffic light must be controlled before reaching the traffic light position, and is determined from the run curve. The expected release time numerator A11 is added to the expected traffic light arrival time t to obtain the expected time t4 of the end of use of the conflict point.

The release time numerator il is the time from reaching the traffic light until passing the conflict point, and in the example of the conflict point Q in FIG. 9, it is the time to pass the track circuits T and T. C in Figure 9
A train conflict point Q is a case where a train departing from the platform passes, and here the signal is controlled according to the scheduled time.

In which case, as shown in Fig. 10(b), the planned departure time is the preliminary time t for starting use of the conflict point, and the release time (trajectory The expected time t4 for the end of use of the conflict point is obtained by adding Tmu3 (time of passage of circuit T and T6). The travel time that appears in the above calculations can be set for each type of train, if necessary. It was obtained as described above. Register the expected conflict point use start/end time "m*'4" in the relevant column of the conflict table.

The time calculated in routine 23 is a time calculated assuming that each train will not be interfered with by other trains. In reality, it may not be possible to proceed according to the time calculation above because there is a train that is scheduled to depart before the car, or because there is another train already in the area you are trying to enter. .

In routine 24, the expected start/end times of use of the competing points are corrected in consideration of constraints imposed by other trains.

In routine 25, the train passing order of the conflict points is determined based on the times calculated in routines 23 and 24 and registered in the conflict table of FIG.

When the conflict point Qz is fixed on the conflict table and viewed vertically, multiple trains are registered, and when they are expected to start using M.
If the time periods from im to the predicted end-of-use time t4 overlap, the trains are in a competitive relationship.

The order determination will be explained using FIG. 11.

T+gg, TttQ) is the expected start/end time of conflict point use regarding conflict point Q of train i (A or B),
The line marked with a '' indicates the amount of time that a car will be delayed due to giving priority to the other train's competition. dA is the delay incurred by train A due to giving priority to train B, and dl is the delay incurred by train B due to giving priority to train passengers, which is called the conflict hindrance time.

One objective function for order judgment is −DA” = W × d A
D j = Wm Xdm and h DA' ≧Dm
``E and other trains will have priority, otherwise 8 trains will have priority.

dmu='? '(Q-'i"Alg d l =TA"(Q-Tm'(Ql, Wm,
W■ is a weight that depends on each signal type, 1 train type, and 0 time period of both trains related to Q.

Another objective function for order judgment is the conflict point Q.

When delays of dA and dl occur, Dh" and Dm" are the weights multiplied by the delay time of one train relative to the scheduled departure time of the relevant train from the relevant section, and as above, DAl≧Da.
” then train A will have priority, otherwise train 8 will have priority.

The difference is that departure time considers delays that take the entire station into consideration when determining local conflict points, while conflict interference time uses only local information for local judgment.

In routine 26, the judgment result in routine 25 is registered in the judgment result table shown in FIG. These tables are stored in the data memory 4, and the judgment result table takes the form of registering several pairs of priority trains and non-priority trains for each conflict point, as shown in the example. The reason why a partial order relationship is adopted in this way and all trains are not ordered is to provide flexibility in determining the order.

In route control processing that uses judgment results, the judgment result table (see Fig. wJ12) corresponding to the conflict points that exist inside the traffic light to be controlled (see Fig. 7) is referred to, and the points where the car does not have priority are determined. If it is not registered, the judgment is OK and permission to control the traffic light is given. Permits will not be granted if the vehicle is registered as a non-priority vehicle.

When the priority train finishes using the relevant conflict point, the ordered pair is deleted from the determination result table.

As explained above, according to the priority determination method of the present invention,
Unlike the conventional method, there is no need to change the program every time the track configuration 9 train operation configuration changes, and it can be handled by simply changing constants, and the judgment logic can be inconsistent even when the track configuration etc. becomes complex. will not occur. Therefore, the effects of the present invention are extremely large.

[Brief explanation of the drawing]

Figure 81 is a diagram for explaining the conventional train control system,
Figure 3 is a block diagram of an example of a train operation management system according to the present invention, Figure 3 is a diagram showing an overview of the operation of the system shown in Figure 2, and Figure 4 is a diagram for explaining an example of priority judgment processing according to the present invention. Incidentally, FIG. 5 is a skeleton flowchart of an example of priority determination according to the present invention, FIGS. 6, 7, and 8 are explanatory diagrams of tables used in the present invention, and FIGS. 9, 10, and 11 are explanatory diagrams of tables used in the present invention. FIG. 12, which is a diagram for showing the time calculation method according to the present invention, is an explanatory diagram of a table showing the priority determination results. 1...Station, 2...Data processing device, 9...Priority judgment processing. Agent Patent Attorney Toshiyuki Usuda 1st Figure Train A VJ 2 Figure VIB Ro\i 6 Figure 7 Figure S 8 Figure'fJq 11th Part '73 /2 Part

Claims (1)

[Claims] 1. In a train control system that controls trains running on a track with signals installed at nine locations, based on the current position and planning information of each train, the routes of trains within the required range intersect. Conflict points are set for each location, and the order in which trains pass is determined for each conflict point. When a signal control request is issued from a certain train, at the conflict points located inside the signal used by the relevant train,
A train control system characterized in that the signal control is permitted if the train in question is not given priority based on the train passing order. 2. In determining the passing order of two trains for each competing point, priority is given to the other train, the delay time for the scheduled departure time of the corresponding station of Tomo's car is calculated, and the train with the greater delay time is given priority. A train control system according to claim 1. 3. In the two train passing j1 pre-order foot for each competing point,
A train control system according to claim 1, characterized in that when priority is given to an opposing train, the amount of conflict hindrance time that an automobile will experience at a corresponding conflict point is calculated, and the train with the greatest amount of conflict hindrance time is given priority. . 4. In calculating the delay time or competition interference time, a weight corresponding to the corresponding signal type, train type, and one time period is applied.
Train control method described in section. 5. In calculating the delay time or competition hindrance time,
Based on the current position of each train and the time when it recently passed the point, calculate the expected signal arrival time when the corresponding train will reach the corresponding signal installation location, and from the signal arrival time, after the signal control output, the train to the signal installation location. The expected start time of use of the conflicting point existing inside the corresponding signal for the corresponding train calculated by subtracting the control time and minutes, which is the running time, and the signal arrival time, after reaching the signal installation location, the corresponding conflicting point is passed. It was calculated by adding up the amount of time required for the conflict to occur. 4. A train control system according to claim 2 or 3, characterized in that the predicted use end time of a competing point existing within the corresponding train and the corresponding signal is used. 6. In calculating the delay time or contention hindrance time,
Using the above-mentioned predicted conflict point usage start time and usage end time, when the conflict usage times of two trains overlap and priority is given to the other train, the rival train's conflict point usage end time is used as the vehicle's conflict point usage start time. 6. The train control system according to claim 5, wherein the predicted time is set as the predicted time, and the predicted time of completion of use of the competing point of the automobile is also made to meet the time difference, and subsequent time calculations are performed.