Estimating the Accuracy of Track-Surveying Trolley Measurements for Railway Maintenance Planning
Publication: Journal of Surveying Engineering
Volume 143, Issue 1
Abstract
Maintenance of the rail track plays an important role in the policies that promote railway transport in the European Union. Each member state has its own railway infrastructure manager that is regulated by the standards set by the European Committee for Standardization (CEN). The standards define three levels for the track geometric quality: the alert limit (AL), the intervention limit (IL), and the immediate action limit (IAL). In the United States, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) manages the railroad safety and national rail transportation policy. They classify nine classes of tracks depending on the maximum allowable speed for freight and passenger trains; each classification has its own track geometric limits from nominal values. Usually, track-survey cars are used to measure the parameters of the geometric quality of the tracks in long sectors, whereas traditional surveying methods (TSMs) or an automated measuring system based on a track-surveying trolley assisted by a robotic total station is chosen for short sectors. In this paper, the authors analyze the precision and performance obtained with the TSM and with an automatic measuring system in its different working modes (stop and go and kinematic), comparing the measured geometric values with the nominal values for a section of a track. The results indicate that TSM and stop-and-go modes yield similar precisions, so both methods can be used to detect the geometric quality levels defined in the CEN and FRA standards. In contrast, kinematic is less accurate, so there are situations where it cannot be used to determine the geometric quality levels. Finally, the authors discuss some recommendations to improve the performance and working methods with the track-surveying trolley.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The authors greatly appreciate the collaboration of the Delegación de Cáceres, the Administrador de Infraestructuras Ferroviarias de España (Ministerio de Fomento), the company Topcon Positioning Spain, and the engineering consulting company Grupo PEYCO in the data acquisition for this work. The anonymous reviewers are kindly acknowledged for their contribution to the improvement of the paper with their valuable comments and suggestions.
References
AAR (Association of American Railroads). (2013). “Total annual spending. 2013 data.” Washington, DC.
Akpinar, B., and Gulal, E. (2012). “Multisensor railway track geometry surveying system.” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., 61(1), 190–197.
Akpinar, B., and Gülal, E. (2013). “Railway track geometry determination using adaptive Kalman filtering model.” Meas., 46(1), 639–645.
Anquela, A., Martín, A., Berné, J., and Padín, J. (2013). “GPS and GLONASS static and kinematic PPP results.” J. Surv. Eng., 47–58.
Chen, Q., Niu, X., Zhang, Q., and Cheng, Y. (2015). “Railway track irregularity measuring by GNSS/INS integration.” J. Inst. Navig., 62(1), 83–93.
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). (2003). Railways applications. Track. Track geometry quality. Part 1: Characterisation of track geometry, Brussels, Belgium, 1–24.
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). (2006). Railways applications. Track. Track geometry quality. Part 2: Measuring systems. Track recording vehicles, Brussels, Belgium, 1–36.
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). (2008). Railways applications. Track. Track geometry quality. Part 5: Geometric quality levels, Brussels, Belgium, 1–22.
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). (2011). Railways applications. Track. Track geometry quality. Part 4: Measuring systems. Manual and lightweight devices, Brussels, Belgium, 1–32.
FRA (Federal Railroad Administration). (2002). Safety of railroad passenger vehicle dynamics: Final summary rep., Washington, DC.
FRA (Federal Railroad Administration). (2014a). Track and rail and infrastructure integrity compliance manual, Vol. II, Chapter 1, track safety standards, Washington, DC.
FRA (Federal Railroad Administration). (2014b). Track and rail and infrastructure integrity compliance manual, Vol. II, Chapter 2, track safety standards, Washington, DC.
Gao, Z., Feng, Q., Wu, S., Cheng, F., Cui, J., and Chen, S. (2010). “Track irregularity inspection trolley based on fiber-optic gyro.” J. Micro/Nanolithogr. MEMS MOEMS, 9(1), 1–4.
Gikas, V. (2005). “Geodetic survey and track recording vehicle data combined for the accurate setting out of rails on slab track.” J. Spatial Sci., 50(2), 13–23.
Gikas, V., and Daskalakis, S. (2008). “Determining rail track axis geometry using satellite and terrestrial geodetic data.” Surv. Rev., 40(310), 392–405.
Gikas, V., and Stratakos, J. (2012). “A novel geodetic engineering method for accurate and automated road/railway centerline geometry extraction based on the bearing diagram and fractal behavior.” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 13(1), 115–126.
Heirich, O., Lehner, A., Robertson, P., and Strang, T. (2011). “Measurement and analysis of train motion and railway track characteristics with inertial sensors.” Proc., 14th Int. IEEE Conf. on Intelligent Transportation Systems, IEEE, New York, 1995–2000.
Hitoshi, T., Yasukuni, N., and Takahito, K. (2014). “Track geometry estimation from car-body vibration, vehicle system dynamics.” Int. J. Veh. Mech. Mobility, 52(1), 207–219.
International Energy Agency. (2010). Energy technology perspectives, Paris, France.
International Union of Railways (UIC). (2010). Monitoring track condition to improve asset management, Paris.
Liu, C., Li, N., Wu, H., and Men, X. (2014). “Detection of high-speed railway subsidence and geometry irregularity using terrestrial laser scanning.” J. Surv. Eng., 1–11.
Martín, A., Anquela, A. B., Capilla, R., and Berné, J. L. (2011). “PPP technique analysis based on time convergence, repeatability, IGS products, different software processing, and GPS + GLONASS constellation.” J. Surv. Eng., 99–108.
Martin, I. (2013). “GNSS precise point positioning: The enhancement with GLONASS.” Ph.D. thesis, Newcastle Univ., Tyne and Wear, U.K.
Pirti, A. (2007). “Performance analysis of the real time kinematic GPS (RTK GPS) technique in a highway project (stake-out).” Surv. Rev., 39(303), 43–53.
Python 2.7 [Computer software]. Python Software Foundation, Beaverton, OR.
Rabiain, A. H., Kealy, A., and Morelande, M. (2013). “Tightly coupled MEMS based INS/GNSS performance evaluation during extended GNSS outages.” J. Appl. Geod., 7(4), 291–298.
Ramos, A., and Fonseca, P. (2012). “A Bayesian model to assess rail track geometry degradation through its life-cycle.” Res. Transp. Econ., 361–8.
Tong, X., Meng, X., and Ding, K. (2010). “Estimating geometric parameters of highways and railways using least-squares adjustment.” Surv. Rev., 42(318), 359–374.
Waston, P. E., Ling, C. S., Goodman, C. J., Roberts, C., Li, P., and Goodall, R. M. (2007). “Monitoring lateral track irregularity from in-service railway vehicles.” J. Rail Rapid Transit, 221(1), 89–100.
Wolde, M., and Ghobbar, A. (2013). “Optimizing inspection intervals—Reliability and availability in terms of a cost model: A case study on railway carriers.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 114, 137–147.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Surveying Engineering
Volume 143 • Issue 1 • February 2017
Copyright
© 2016 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Apr 27, 2015
Accepted: Apr 15, 2016
Published online: May 31, 2016
Discussion open until: Oct 31, 2016
Published in print: Feb 1, 2017
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.