IEEE Rail Transit Vehicle Interface Standards Committee
MEETING OF WORKING GROUP #2
COMMUNICATION BASED TRAIN CONTROL
Date: August 21, 2002 - 8:30 am
Place: Parsons, 100 Broadway, New York, NY
Attendees:
Name |
Representing |
Email |
|
Corinne Braban |
Siemens |
|
|
Pierre Brunet |
Earth Tech |
|
|
Fred Childs |
PATH |
|
|
Michael Crispo |
CTA |
|
|
Jim Dietz |
LTK Engineering |
|
|
Tony Fedor |
Times Microwave |
|
|
Harvey Glickenstein |
PB |
|
|
Seyed Hosseini |
Metro North |
|
|
Geoff Hubbs |
NYCT |
|
|
Ken Karg |
Bombardier |
|
|
John LaForce |
SEPTA |
|
|
Sam Lott |
JKH Mobility |
|
|
Bob MacDonald |
HNTB |
|
|
Dave Male |
Systra |
|
|
Norm May |
Lea + Elliott |
|
|
Bill Petit |
Safetran |
|
|
Alan Rumsey |
Parsons |
|
|
Errol Taylor |
WMATA |
|
|
John Vogler |
NJ Transit |
|
|
Naor Wallach |
Alstom |
|
|
Robert Walsh |
Bombardier |
|
|
Firth Whitwam |
Alcatel |
|
|
Glen Winters |
Lea + Elliott |
Minutes of Meeting:
1.
HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS
1.1.
Introductions
Alan Rumsey welcomed participants to this meeting of Working Group #2 (WG2) of the Rail Transit Vehicle Interface Standards Committee (RTVISC), hosted by Parsons.
1.2.
Review of Previous
WG2 Meeting Minutes
The minutes of the previous WG2 meeting held on May 30, 2002 were reviewed and accepted as written.
1.3.
Date/Location of
Next WG2 Meeting
The next WG2 meeting will be held on November 1, 2002 in Oakland, California and will be hosted by BART (Bob Miller).
2.
STATUS OF DRAFT
D9.0 OF PROPOSED STANDARD 1474.2 “USER INTERFACE REQUIREMENTS IN CBTC SYSTEMS
2.1.
IEEE Editorial
Review
Alan Rumsey advised that the IEEE editor had completed a pre-ballot review of the draft standard with only minor modification recommended. These recommendations will be incorporated into draft D9.1, which will become the ballot version of the proposed standard 1474.2.
2.2.
Ballot Group
A provisional ballot group has been identified for 1474.2. The WG2 chair will contact each participant to confirm their willingness to serve on the ballot group, and that they are members of the IEEE Standards Association.
3.
UPDATES TO IEEE STD. 1474.1-1999 “CBTC PERFORMANCE AND
FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS”
3.1.
Review of Changes
to Section 4 (General Requirements)
Section 4 - as
updated at the previous WG2 meeting to include other transit applications, such
as automated people movers – was reviewed and additional changes identified,
specifically with respect to subsection 4.5.1.2 (Failure mode operations in
CBTC territory). It was agreed to
stress that the primary goal of the fall-back plan was to eliminate
unacceptable hazards to passengers and staff.
It was also agreed to re-title section 4.6 as “Entering/exiting CBTC
territory”.
3.2.
Review of Changes
to Section 6.1 (ATP Functional Requirements)
Section 6.1 – as updated at the previous WG2 meeting – was reviewed and
additional minor changes identified.
Specifically, it was agreed to expand section 6.1.2 to allow for
automatic coupling, and to include consideration of platform edge door status
in establishing movement authority limits.
3.3.
Line-by-Line Review
of Section 6.2 (ATO Functional Requirements)
A line-by-line review of section 6.2 was completed and a number of changes were agreed to in order to accommodate operations without crews. Specifically, the introductory paragraph will be updated to reflect that ATO functions are mandatory for operations without crews, and section 6.2.3 (Train door control) will be expanded to include consideration of platform edge doors.
3.4.
Line-by-Line Review
of Section 6.3 (ATS Functional Requirements)
A line-by-line review of section 6.3 was completed and a number of
changes were agreed to in order to accommodate operations without crews. Specifically, the introductory paragraph
will be updated to reflect that some level of ATS functionality is mandatory
for operations without crews and the remaining subsections will be updated to
clarify those functions that are considered mandatory.
4. ANY
OTHER BUSINESS
4.1.
Next Meeting Agenda
The agenda for
the next WG2 meeting on November 1 will be to review changes incorporated into
the draft standard as a result of agreements at this meeting, and to conduct a
line-by-line review of section 5.3 (System safety requirements).
Alan Rumsey will
reissue the draft standard (as draft D3.0), no later than October 15,
2002. Any additional comments on draft
D2.0 should therefore be forwarded to the WG2 chair no later than September 30,
2002.
4.2.
Funding for Agency
Representatives Attending WG2 Meetings
With the
transition of the RTVISC activities from the TRB to APTA, Jim Deitz advised
that no funding was currently available to assist transit agency
representatives attending WG2 meetings.
It was noted that the RTVISC OCS working groups have taken the
initiative of establishing a fund, to be administered by APTA, whereby
suppliers represented on the OCS working groups contribute limited funds to
assist transit agency representatives attend OCS working group meetings.
Efforts are
underway to explore if additional funds can be made available through APTA in
the future.
4.3.
APTA Rail Transit
Standards
Bill Petit advised the WG that that the APTA Rail Transit Standards
Operating Practices Committee was developing a standard for Operating Rules
Pertaining to Rail Transit System Signals.
Section 7 of this draft standard briefly addresses advanced technology
signal systems (such as CBTC). The
draft standard will be posted on the www.tsd.org
web site for the information of WG2 members.
4.4.
University of
Virginia
Bill Petit
advised the WG that the University of Virginia had established a Center of Rail
Safety-Critical Excellence, supporting the FRA and transit. APTA’s Lou Sanders is on the Advisory Board.
4.5.
Project Updates
Brief project
updates were provided on the NYCT, SEPTA and BART CBTC programs.
4.6.
Shared Radio
Communication Link for CBTC
The potential use of a CBTC train-to-wayside data communication link to transmit other non-train control data (such as video) was briefly discussed by WG2 participants.
The general consensus was that this is less a technical issue, and more an "institutional" issue.
For train control, there are three characteristics of the datalink that are considered important:
a) Bandwidth (the amount of data that needs to be transferred)
b) Message latency (the maximum communication delay that can be tolerated by the train control system in delivering a message in order to meet the overall system performance requirements, in terms of headway and travel times).
c) Message delivery reliability (the tolerance of the train control system to short term interruptions in data communications).
"Safety" is not a specific issue as such, since it is the vital processors at each end of the datalink that assure the safety of the train control system which is required to "fail safe" in the event of corrupted or loss of data.
With respect to bandwidth, it was the general view of WG2 that this is becoming less of an issue with newer technology i.e. it is possible to provide a datalink with sufficient bandwidth to support both train control and non-train control functions. The "institutional" issue is "who controls the allocation of bandwidth", and how do you assure that in the future, bandwidth that had been reserved for train control purposes is not re-assigned to other non-train control uses.
Also of concern with a shared datalink is controlling message priorities, particularly with train control systems that rely on a polled communications protocol, to ensure acceptable train control message latency and message delivery reliability. Again, the issue here is less that of designing an acceptable shared datalink on day one, but more the institutional issue of managing the configuration control of a shared datalink over time.
4.7.
2003 CBTC
Conference
Alan Rumsey advised
the WG that the next Railway Age/Parsons CBTC Conference would be held in
Washington on May 7/8, 2003.
Minutes prepared
by:
Dr. Alan F. Rumsey
WG2 Chair