Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Module 1 2017 Paper Question 8 Attempt
#1
Morning All,

Please see attached module 1 2017 paper question 8 attempt for comment.

Many thanks.


Attached Files
.pdf   Module 1 2017 Paper Question 8.pdf (Size: 452.94 KB / Downloads: 19)
.pdf   Module 1 2017 Paper Question 8 Attempt 180918.pdf (Size: 2.31 MB / Downloads: 22)
Reply
#2
REMBrum,

Looks like a good answer to me. Just a few thoughts (not sure I'm particularly qualified to comment, but there you go Smile ):

1. Would suggest axle counters may be cheaper than TCs to install (no need for IRJs, track bonds, etc), some ACs clamp onto rails (depends on type).

2. You may want to caveat max/minimum track circuit distance, varies depending on type.

3. Another disadvantage of wireless comms - some active trackside transponders require battery changes.

4. For wireless comms I guess loss of track-train comms is the obvious risk I didn't see covered. Classic mitigation is 'fallback' fixed block detection
Reply
#3
Yes good points- thanks for the feedback. I've also requested feedback from colleagues so will add it to this thread for reference.
Reply
#4
I'm looking at an AxC conversion project at the moment and the main driver is reliability (or the cost of failed track circuits). Both Thales and Frauscher have electromagnetic heads which clamp to the rail. They need a box of electronics (Thales) or a dis-box (frauscher) on the trackside so although installing and adjusting the sensor is fairly fast, there is also the cost of mounting the box and connecting the cables.
Anecdotal evidence says the frauscher can be damaged by rail grinding and the Thales suffers from EMI (some new types of train).

The bleeding edge technology (on trial, not yet product approved) is an optical sensor which glues to the rail web.
Reply
#5
(20-09-2018, 04:45 PM)dorothy.pipet Wrote: I'm looking at an AxC conversion project at the moment and the main driver is reliability (or the cost of failed track circuits). Both Thales and Frauscher have electromagnetic heads which clamp to the rail. They need a box of electronics (Thales) or a dis-box (frauscher) on the trackside so although installing and adjusting the sensor is fairly fast, there is also the cost of mounting the box and connecting the cables.
Anecdotal evidence says the frauscher can be damaged by rail grinding and the Thales suffers from EMI (some new types of train).

The bleeding edge technology (on trial, not yet product approved) is an optical sensor which glues to the rail web.

Thanks Dorothy,

The colleague in question also reminded me I should consider the reliability of assets preventing trackside access requirements for faulting, which would align with the reliability of items above. I also recalled some instances of operational axle counters being detached from the railhead and left in the 6ft, causing a wrong side failure.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)