[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

EP2585353A2 - System for localizing objects on a railway track, and method therefor - Google Patents

System for localizing objects on a railway track, and method therefor

Info

Publication number
EP2585353A2
EP2585353A2 EP11729182.3A EP11729182A EP2585353A2 EP 2585353 A2 EP2585353 A2 EP 2585353A2 EP 11729182 A EP11729182 A EP 11729182A EP 2585353 A2 EP2585353 A2 EP 2585353A2
Authority
EP
European Patent Office
Prior art keywords
sensors
railway track
control unit
distance
successive
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Granted
Application number
EP11729182.3A
Other languages
German (de)
French (fr)
Other versions
EP2585353B1 (en
Inventor
Ronald Johannes Bakker
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Individual
Original Assignee
Individual
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Individual filed Critical Individual
Publication of EP2585353A2 publication Critical patent/EP2585353A2/en
Application granted granted Critical
Publication of EP2585353B1 publication Critical patent/EP2585353B1/en
Not-in-force legal-status Critical Current
Anticipated expiration legal-status Critical

Links

Classifications

    • B—PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
    • B61—RAILWAYS
    • B61L—GUIDING RAILWAY TRAFFIC; ENSURING THE SAFETY OF RAILWAY TRAFFIC
    • B61L1/00—Devices along the route controlled by interaction with the vehicle or train
    • B61L1/12—Electric devices associated with overhead trolley wires
    • B—PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
    • B61—RAILWAYS
    • B61L—GUIDING RAILWAY TRAFFIC; ENSURING THE SAFETY OF RAILWAY TRAFFIC
    • B61L23/00—Control, warning or like safety means along the route or between vehicles or trains
    • B61L23/04—Control, warning or like safety means along the route or between vehicles or trains for monitoring the mechanical state of the route
    • B61L23/041—Obstacle detection
    • B—PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
    • B61—RAILWAYS
    • B61L—GUIDING RAILWAY TRAFFIC; ENSURING THE SAFETY OF RAILWAY TRAFFIC
    • B61L25/00—Recording or indicating positions or identities of vehicles or trains or setting of track apparatus
    • B61L25/02—Indicating or recording positions or identities of vehicles or trains
    • B61L25/025—Absolute localisation, e.g. providing geodetic coordinates
    • B—PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
    • B61—RAILWAYS
    • B61L—GUIDING RAILWAY TRAFFIC; ENSURING THE SAFETY OF RAILWAY TRAFFIC
    • B61L29/00—Safety means for rail/road crossing traffic
    • B61L29/24—Means for warning road traffic that a gate is closed or closing, or that rail traffic is approaching, e.g. for visible or audible warning
    • B61L29/28—Means for warning road traffic that a gate is closed or closing, or that rail traffic is approaching, e.g. for visible or audible warning electrically operated
    • B61L29/30—Supervision, e.g. monitoring arrangements

Definitions

  • the present invention relates to a system for localizing objects on a railway track and to a method therefor .
  • the electrical track circuit system dates from 1872 and is based on electrical short-circuiting of rails. This short-circuiting occurs when a train enters a determined governed section (also referred to as governed (rail) block) and via its wheels and axle situated therebetween closes a circuit between the different rails.
  • the electrical track circuit system then assumes that a train is situated within a determined block and designates the relevant block as occupied.
  • a second detection system which was first applied in 1960, is the axle counter system, which detects the number of wheels/axles at a starting point and an end point of a predetermined block. If the number of axles at the start of the block is higher than the number of axles counted at the end of the block, it is assumed that the block is occupied.
  • ERTMS European Rail Traffic Management System
  • the rail routes are subdivided into blocks of different lengths, sometimes up to 5 kilometres long.
  • a block in which a train is located is designated as occupied and for safety reasons the block from which the train has come is not fully cleared. At a block length of five kilometres this may mean that a length of ten
  • Timetable-free travel is understood to mean that trains travel according to logistical availability and are not tied to predetermined specific times.
  • Block systems have the further drawback that in the case of a suspected error message, for instance due to vandalism, the whole block has to be checked for the presence of an object before this block can be fully cleared.
  • a block length of for instance 50 kilometres the engineer who clears the block manually no longer has an overall view hereof, which means that the train will travel through the block at reduced speed in order to be able to stop in good time in the case an object is present.
  • the limited speed permitted for safety reasons can result in disruption of the rail system.
  • resetting takes place manually in the axle counter system, and this is time- consuming .
  • a further drawback of the above stated electrical track circuit system and axle counter system is that they are susceptible to vandalism.
  • the electrical track circuit system it is for instance possible to complete a circuit between connected blocks by arranging coins in a gap between different blocks, which causes confusion in the system.
  • a circuit can be completed for instance by electrically connecting the two rails with a jump lead, which causes the electrical track circuit system to suspect that a train is located within this block.
  • the axle counter system can be disordered by for instance moving a metal object such as a spade in front of the sensor, this being detected by the system as a passing train wheel.
  • axle counter system A further drawback of the axle counter system is that a minimum wheel size is required before a reliable registration of each wheel takes place.
  • the axle counter system is hereby unsuitable for detecting all types of rail machinery placed on the track for the purpose of work on the track.
  • Rust formation on the rails can also result in the electrical track circuit system in trains not being detected by the system. Attempts are made to prevent this by the so- called erusting' runs before regular train traffic begins.
  • EMC electromagnetic compatibility
  • All the above stated train detection systems further have the shortcoming that they are only able to detect trains or similar vehicles on a block, and not for instance a car blocking a level crossing.
  • DE-U1-297 24 276 discloses a monitoring system for preventive safeguarding of a route where work is taking place on the track, wherein a single sensor is equipped with two separate channels for measuring separate parameters.
  • the first channel is directed transversely of the railway track and detects, via a radar signal which measures the distance, whether an object is situated on the railway track. Because it is required for the purpose of giving an alarm that the second channel, which is directed obliquely at an angle of 3$ to the railway track, simultaneously measures a speed via Doppler, the number of error messages - for instance because there is an animal on the track - is reduced.
  • An object of the present invention is to provide a system and method for localizing objects on a railway track in which the stated drawbacks do not occur, or at least do so to lesser extent.
  • control unit which is connected to each of the sensors and receives an identifiable warning signal from the individual sensors when they detect an object in their detection area of the railway track;
  • control unit generates an alarm if the measurement data detected by the successive sensors comply with a predetermined condition
  • the sensors are distance sensors and, in the case a distance reduction is detected by at least two successive sensors, the control unit assumes that there is an object on the railway track.
  • An identifiable warning signal is understood to mean that there is a link between the warning signal and a unique sensor of the system.
  • the warning signal is a report of a measured condition to the control unit.
  • the successive similar reports are assessed by the control unit, which only assumes that there is an object on the railway track if it receives similar warning signals from a predetermined number of successive sensors.
  • the successive sensors measure the same quantity and transmit the value of the measured quantity as warning signal to the control unit, wherein the control unit generates an alarm if the measurement data detected by the successive sensors comply with a predetermined condition.
  • Conditions against which measurement data detected by successive sensors could be tested are for instance "the distance is smaller than a threshold value” or "the distance lies within a determined range”.
  • the successive sensors form part of an AND-circuit, wherein the control unit requires in each case that a plurality of successive sensors transmit comparable data to the control unit before an alarm is issued.
  • the sensors are arranged such that their measuring direction is oriented transversely of the railway track and in the direction of the railway track. This has the advantage, among others, that the measurement distance is kept limited, which increases accuracy.
  • control unit assumes that there is an object on the railway track when a warning signal is received from at least three successive sensors.
  • the reliability increases and the susceptibility to vandalism decreases significantly. It would after all require at least three different people to cause three successive sensors to detect an object.
  • the sensors are arranged at some mutual distance in longitudinal direction of the railway track.
  • a distance between the different sensors is known, it is also possible to derive the direction of travel and speed of this object in addition to determining its position.
  • successive sensors are arranged at a predetermined mutual distance from each other.
  • the distance between successive sensors is constant, which simplifies the determination of position and speed.
  • successive sensors are arranged at a distance of a minimum of two metres, more preferably at a distance of about four metres, from each other.
  • a single train carriage is a minimum of 12 metres long, a single lost' train carriage will be detected by a minimum of three successive sensors.
  • the system is hereby also suitable for detecting lost carriages in addition to position determination.
  • the system according to the invention requires no additional electrical track circuit or axle counter system.
  • the sensors are arranged over substantially the whole length of the railway track.
  • the system is hereby not only able to detect a presence of a train in a block, but can also - depending on the distance between the sensors - give an accurate approximation of the location of the train on the railway track.
  • the system can determine where trains and/or other objects are situated on the railway track.
  • it is unnecessary to visually inspect a presence of a train in a (rail) block, which can be up to 5 km long.
  • the system is hereby self-starting and soon fully operational again following brief failure.
  • the system can hereby be applied within future logistical concepts such as timetable-free travel .
  • the system is after all still reliable when one sensor, or even two successive sensors, are defective.
  • the detection areas monitored by the sensors are separate areas which have no overlap. Because there is no overlap, it is known very precisely, owing to the warning signal which is linked identifiably to a unique sensor, where the object, generally a train (section) , is situated on the railway track.
  • the sensors are distance sensors and,
  • control unit assumes that there is an object on the railway track.
  • the distance detected in the case of an unoccupied track is about 5 to 6 metres.
  • a smaller distance is detected.
  • the detected distance is suddenly reduced by 3 metres. Owing to the predictability in distance change the system is not susceptible to
  • sensors which are able to measure a distance offer further advantages.
  • Each distance sensor can be used to make a
  • each railway track is provided with its own series of distance sensors, whereby only the adjacent track has to be monitored in each case.
  • distance sensors have the advantage that all components can be accommodated in a single sensor housing, while for instance optical sensors always comprise at least two components: a transmitter and a receiver, optionally with one or more reflectors, or a combined transmitter/receiver with one or more reflectors. All these individual components may become unusable, for instance due to technical failure or due to contamination (obstructions or scaling) which disrupts the optical system.
  • a self-testing system is also obtained by using distance sensors. When a distance sensor fails it will measure a distance zero, which is noted by the control unit. The skilled person will appreciate that, when any sensor which in principle measures continuously fails, this is recognizable as such.
  • Self-test capability is also obtained in yet another preferred embodiment by tracking in the control unit whether all sensors make a measurement within a determined relative measurement value when a train travels over the railway track. In the case one sensor deviates repeatedly, this sensor is designated by the system as a sensor to be checked/replaced.
  • the distance sensors comprise an ultrasonic sensor and/or a radar and/or a laser.
  • Such sensors have the advantage that the transmitter and receiver are housed in the same unit.
  • the sensors are arranged above the railway track and their detection area extends downward in the direction of the track.
  • Arranging the sensors above the railway track has several advantages, including not being susceptible to vandalism.
  • the sensors can be placed above the railway track without time-consuming excavation operations.
  • Sensors arranged on the cables above the railway track also provide the option of early detection of such a cable becoming detached, whereby the trains can be informed of this and it is possible to prevent kilometres of cable being pulled loose. This happens several times a year and the necessary repair operations can easily make the relevant route unusable for two days.
  • Distance sensors which are arranged above the railway track and detect in downward direction therefore provide the system with a high degree of self-test capability.
  • Sensors which are arranged above the railway track and detect in downward direction are more likely to detect an object on the track than sensors which detect in a lying plane. This is because the height at which a sensor
  • detecting in a lying plane detects determines whether an object is detected or whether the sensor detects below or above the object.
  • a downward viewing sensor is not
  • additional sensors are arranged in the vicinity of the railway track and these additional sensors each cover a separate detection area of the level crossing so that objects blocking the railway track at the position of the level crossing can be detected by the system.
  • the mutual distance between the sensors close to the level crossing is a maximum of 2 metres. Objects from two metres in length can hereby be detected, including passenger cars blocking the railway track at the position of the level crossing.
  • the invention further relates to a method for localizing objects on a railway track, comprising the steps of:
  • control unit generating an alarm if the measurement data detected by the successive sensors comply with a predetermined condition
  • the sensors are distance sensors and, in the case a distance reduction is detected by at least two successive sensors, the control unit assumes that there is an object on the railway track.
  • the sensors are arranged above the railway track, and their detection area extends downward in the direction of the railway track.
  • Figure 1 shows a view of a train on a track provided with the system according to the invention
  • Figure 2 shows a view of a carriage which has remained behind on the track provided with the system according to the invention.
  • Figure 3 shows a top view of a level crossing.
  • Figure 1 shows a section of railway track 4 on which a train 21 is situated.
  • Train 21 consists of a locomotive 22 and a carriage 24 drawn thereby.
  • An overhead line 26 located above railway track 4 is an overhead line 26 on which sensors 8 are arranged at a constant mutual distance.
  • Sensors 8 which in the shown embodiment comprise ultrasonic sensors, preferably have non-overlapping
  • detection areas 10 extending downward from sensor 8 in the direction of railway track 4.
  • Each unique sensor 8 thus covers a unique part of railway track 4 with its detection area 10.
  • control unit 6 receives identifiable warning signals from all sensors 8 under which object 2 is situated, such as locomotive 22 and carriage 24 in figure 1, control unit 6 is able to determine the length of a train 21.
  • system is also suitable for detecting individual objects 2, such as for instance a *lost' carriage 24, on railway track 4 (figure 2).
  • successive sensors 8 is known, in addition to the position determination it is also possible to determine the speed of train 21, and optionally even the acceleration or
  • a sensor (not shown) is arranged at a predetermined distance corresponding to twenty-one seconds travel time to the railway crossing at the permitted travel speed.
  • barriers 20 of level crossing 16 are closed.
  • barriers 20 are also closed at the same distance between train 21 and level crossing 16, although because of the lower speed the train 21 will take longer than twenty-one seconds to travel this distance. If a train 21 travels at half the permitted speed, the waiting time is as much as forty-two seconds.
  • control unit 6 can precisely determine when train 21 will pass level crossing 16. Barriers 20 can therefore be controlled in dynamic manner, i.e. subject to the travel speed of train 21, whereby the waiting times for traffic 18 crossing railway track 4 are minimized. Traffic flow is hereby enhanced and unsafe situations arising from impatient road users are prevented.
  • the system is further expanded with additional sensors 12 which are situated close to level crossing 16, close to the lane of crossing traffic 18.
  • additional sensors 12 which are situated close to level crossing 16, close to the lane of crossing traffic 18.
  • this object 2 is detected by the additional sensors 12 and control unit 6 will intervene and cause the train 21 approaching level crossing 16 to make an automatic emergency stop.
  • control unit 6 can, if desired, already assume when there are a smaller number of sensors 8, 12 that an object 2, 18 is situated on railway track 4 at level crossing 16 and take suitable measures. When for instance a detection by only two sensors 8, 12 suffices, smaller objects 2 can then also be detected.
  • system according to the invention is also suitable for detecting objects 2 other than a train 21 or a carriage 24 on railway track 4.
  • the system according to the invention provides, among others, the following advantages:
  • sensors 8, 12 can be arranged on the existing overhead line and no additional excavation operations are required per sensor;
  • sensors 8, 12 can be checked, replaced or repaired at a quiet moment suitable for the purpose

Landscapes

  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Mechanical Engineering (AREA)
  • Automation & Control Theory (AREA)
  • Train Traffic Observation, Control, And Security (AREA)

Abstract

The invention relates to a system for localizing objects on a railway track, comprising: - at least two sensors which are arranged in the vicinity of the railway track and each cover a separate detection area of the railway track; - a control unit which is connected to each of the sensors and receives an identifiable warning signal from the individual sensors when they detect an object in their detection area of the railway track; - wherein the successive sensors measure and transmit the same quantity to the control unit as warning signal; - wherein the control unit generates an alarm if the measurement data detected by the successive sensors comply with a predetermined condition; and - wherein the sensors are distance sensors and, in the case a distance reduction is detected by at least two successive sensors, the control unit assumes that there is an object on the railway track. The invention further relates to a method for applying such a system.

Description

SYSTEM FOR LOCALIZING OBJECTS ON A RAILWAY TRACK,
AND METHOD THEREFOR
The present invention relates to a system for localizing objects on a railway track and to a method therefor .
There are at the moment three main categories of detection system in use for detecting trains on a railway track. The electrical track circuit system dates from 1872 and is based on electrical short-circuiting of rails. This short-circuiting occurs when a train enters a determined governed section (also referred to as governed (rail) block) and via its wheels and axle situated therebetween closes a circuit between the different rails. The electrical track circuit system then assumes that a train is situated within a determined block and designates the relevant block as occupied.
A second detection system, which was first applied in 1960, is the axle counter system, which detects the number of wheels/axles at a starting point and an end point of a predetermined block. If the number of axles at the start of the block is higher than the number of axles counted at the end of the block, it is assumed that the block is occupied.
The drawback of both the electrical track circuit system and the axle counter system is that, although it is known that a determined block is occupied, no accurate position determination is possible within this block, which can be up to 5 kilometres long.
In order to also be able to determine the position of the train the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) has been developed, which makes use of GPS, balises and GSM-R for determining the position of the train. Since ERTMS is not able to determine the length of the train and, when a carriage is lost, does not therefore give a report to this effect, an axle counter system or electrical track circuit system is still always applied in addition to the ERMTS .
All the above stated systems, the electrical track circuit system, the axle counter system and ERMTS, are so- called block systems. The rail routes are subdivided into blocks of different lengths, sometimes up to 5 kilometres long. A block in which a train is located is designated as occupied and for safety reasons the block from which the train has come is not fully cleared. At a block length of five kilometres this may mean that a length of ten
kilometres is kept clear of other train traffic, this standing in the way of a high degree of occupancy of the track necessary for instance for timetable-free travel.
Timetable-free travel is understood to mean that trains travel according to logistical availability and are not tied to predetermined specific times.
A possible solution of using smaller blocks of for instance 2.5 kilometres doubles the costs of the system. The typical costs per block are substantially independent of the length thereof and lie in the order of magnitude of
€400, 000.00.
Block systems have the further drawback that in the case of a suspected error message, for instance due to vandalism, the whole block has to be checked for the presence of an object before this block can be fully cleared. At a block length of for instance 50 kilometres the engineer who clears the block manually no longer has an overall view hereof, which means that the train will travel through the block at reduced speed in order to be able to stop in good time in the case an object is present. The limited speed permitted for safety reasons can result in disruption of the rail system. In addition, resetting takes place manually in the axle counter system, and this is time- consuming .
A further drawback of the above stated electrical track circuit system and axle counter system is that they are susceptible to vandalism. In the electrical track circuit system it is for instance possible to complete a circuit between connected blocks by arranging coins in a gap between different blocks, which causes confusion in the system. In addition, a circuit can be completed for instance by electrically connecting the two rails with a jump lead, which causes the electrical track circuit system to suspect that a train is located within this block. The axle counter system can be disordered by for instance moving a metal object such as a spade in front of the sensor, this being detected by the system as a passing train wheel.
Another form of vandalism is the theft of copper in the electrical track circuit system. The thick copper wires used are popular with thieves. When a copper wire is stolen, the track is designated as occupied. Repair is costly in terms of time and money. In 2009 the costs associated with copper theft in the Netherlands amounted to more than ten million Euros.
A further drawback of the axle counter system is that a minimum wheel size is required before a reliable registration of each wheel takes place. The axle counter system is hereby unsuitable for detecting all types of rail machinery placed on the track for the purpose of work on the track.
Further drawbacks of the electrical track circuit system lie in the fact that in the autumn a covering of leaves present on a rail track can function as electrical insulator, whereby no circuit is realized, and may result in the highly undesirable situation that for instance barriers at level crossings no longer close when a train approaches. This problem is also known under the term loss of shunt.
Rust formation on the rails can also result in the electrical track circuit system in trains not being detected by the system. Attempts are made to prevent this by the so- called erusting' runs before regular train traffic begins.
In addition, use is increasingly being made nowadays of rail vehicles with wheels provided with ball bearings.
Because the wheels on both sides of the rail vehicle are no longer directly connected to each other with an efficient electrically conducting axle, such wheels provided with ball bearings are less suitable for the electrical track circuit system.
Another significant problem for both the electrical track circuit system and the axle counter system is the sensitivity to electromagnetic radiation, also referred to as electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) . While 800-1500 V is applied in conventional trains, this has been increased to 25 kV in the High-Speed Line (HSL) . The associated increase in electromagnetic radiation is expected to result in an increase in EMC problems.
All the above stated train detection systems further have the shortcoming that they are only able to detect trains or similar vehicles on a block, and not for instance a car blocking a level crossing.
DE-U1-297 24 276 discloses a monitoring system for preventive safeguarding of a route where work is taking place on the track, wherein a single sensor is equipped with two separate channels for measuring separate parameters. The first channel is directed transversely of the railway track and detects, via a radar signal which measures the distance, whether an object is situated on the railway track. Because it is required for the purpose of giving an alarm that the second channel, which is directed obliquely at an angle of 3$ to the railway track, simultaneously measures a speed via Doppler, the number of error messages - for instance because there is an animal on the track - is reduced.
An object of the present invention is to provide a system and method for localizing objects on a railway track in which the stated drawbacks do not occur, or at least do so to lesser extent.
The stated object is achieved with the system for localizing objects on a railway track, comprising:
- at least two sensors which are arranged in the vicinity of the railway track and each cover a separate detection area of the railway track;
- a control unit which is connected to each of the sensors and receives an identifiable warning signal from the individual sensors when they detect an object in their detection area of the railway track;
- wherein the successive sensors measure and transmit the same quantity to the control unit as warning signal;
- wherein the control unit generates an alarm if the measurement data detected by the successive sensors comply with a predetermined condition; and
- wherein the sensors are distance sensors and, in the case a distance reduction is detected by at least two successive sensors, the control unit assumes that there is an object on the railway track.
Because at least two sensors cover a separate detection area of the railway track and transmit an
identifiable warning signal to the control unit when they detect an object in their detection area of the railway track, the system knows where an object is situated. It is particularly noted that all kinds of object of any size can be detected with the system and, unlike the above discussed systems {electrical track circuit system, axle counter system and ERT S) , it is not limited to trains within a block.
An identifiable warning signal is understood to mean that there is a link between the warning signal and a unique sensor of the system.
It is noted that the warning signal is a report of a measured condition to the control unit. The successive similar reports are assessed by the control unit, which only assumes that there is an object on the railway track if it receives similar warning signals from a predetermined number of successive sensors.
The successive sensors measure the same quantity and transmit the value of the measured quantity as warning signal to the control unit, wherein the control unit generates an alarm if the measurement data detected by the successive sensors comply with a predetermined condition.
Conditions against which measurement data detected by successive sensors could be tested are for instance "the distance is smaller than a threshold value" or "the distance lies within a determined range".
The successive sensors form part of an AND-circuit, wherein the control unit requires in each case that a plurality of successive sensors transmit comparable data to the control unit before an alarm is issued.
According to a preferred embodiment, the sensors are arranged such that their measuring direction is oriented transversely of the railway track and in the direction of the railway track. This has the advantage, among others, that the measurement distance is kept limited, which increases accuracy.
According to a further preferred embodiment, the control unit assumes that there is an object on the railway track when a warning signal is received from at least three successive sensors. The reliability increases and the susceptibility to vandalism decreases significantly. It would after all require at least three different people to cause three successive sensors to detect an object.
According to yet another preferred embodiment, the sensors are arranged at some mutual distance in longitudinal direction of the railway track. When a distance between the different sensors is known, it is also possible to derive the direction of travel and speed of this object in addition to determining its position.
According to yet another preferred embodiment, successive sensors are arranged at a predetermined mutual distance from each other. When the distance between
individual sensors is known, it is also possible to
determine the speed of the train in addition to an accurate position determination.
According to yet another preferred embodiment, the distance between successive sensors is constant, which simplifies the determination of position and speed.
According to yet another preferred embodiment, successive sensors are arranged at a distance of a minimum of two metres, more preferably at a distance of about four metres, from each other. The greater the mutual distance between sensors, the fewer sensors are required and the cheaper the system is. Because a single train carriage is a minimum of 12 metres long, a single lost' train carriage will be detected by a minimum of three successive sensors. The system is hereby also suitable for detecting lost carriages in addition to position determination. In contrast to ERTMS, which does enable position determination, the system according to the invention requires no additional electrical track circuit or axle counter system.
According to yet another preferred embodiment, the sensors are arranged over substantially the whole length of the railway track. The system is hereby not only able to detect a presence of a train in a block, but can also - depending on the distance between the sensors - give an accurate approximation of the location of the train on the railway track.
With sensors over substantially the whole length of the railway track the system is moreover no longer limited to application within conventional blocks.
Following brief failure due to malfunction the system can determine where trains and/or other objects are situated on the railway track. In contrast to conventional block systems, it is unnecessary to visually inspect a presence of a train in a (rail) block, which can be up to 5 km long. The system is hereby self-starting and soon fully operational again following brief failure.
Furthermore, because an accurate position
determination of trains on a railway route is possible, the degree of occupancy of the track can be increased while safety remains guaranteed. The system can hereby be applied within future logistical concepts such as timetable-free travel .
When a sufficiently large number of sensors is applied, the option is also provided of monitoring,
replacing or repairing the sensors at a suitable point in time. The system is after all still reliable when one sensor, or even two successive sensors, are defective.
Replacement can take place at a quiet moment suitable for the purpose so that there is minimum disruption to rail traffic. The system is reliable and not susceptible to malfunction, since the system continues to function even when several sensors fail.
According to yet another preferred embodiment, the detection areas monitored by the sensors are separate areas which have no overlap. Because there is no overlap, it is known very precisely, owing to the warning signal which is linked identifiably to a unique sensor, where the object, generally a train (section) , is situated on the railway track.
The sensors are distance sensors and,
in the case a distance reduction is detected by at least two successive sensors, the control unit assumes that there is an object on the railway track.
When the sensors are for instance arranged above the railway track with their detection area extending downward in the direction of the railway track, the distance detected in the case of an unoccupied track is about 5 to 6 metres. A soon as a train or other object is located under these sensors, a smaller distance is detected. In the case of a train of 3 metres in height the detected distance is suddenly reduced by 3 metres. Owing to the predictability in distance change the system is not susceptible to
malfunction.
In contrast to sensors which only detect a presence (true/false) of an object, as is for instance the case with optical sensors, sensors which are able to measure a distance offer further advantages.
Each distance sensor can be used to make a
distinction between the closest railway track which has to be monitored and a possible other track situated adjacently thereof. At a distance above a determined threshold value it is known that this object is not situated on the adjacent track to be monitored. In order to prevent errors caused by unseen vehicles each railway track is provided with its own series of distance sensors, whereby only the adjacent track has to be monitored in each case.
In addition, distance sensors have the advantage that all components can be accommodated in a single sensor housing, while for instance optical sensors always comprise at least two components: a transmitter and a receiver, optionally with one or more reflectors, or a combined transmitter/receiver with one or more reflectors. All these individual components may become unusable, for instance due to technical failure or due to contamination (obstructions or scaling) which disrupts the optical system.
In the case of sensors which are arranged adjacently of the railway track and which measure distance in for instance a substantially horizontal plane, when a railway track is not occupied the detected distances can vary greatly between the different sensors depending on the free field of vision. A much shorter distance will however also be suddenly detected here when a train moves through the detection area.
A self-testing system is also obtained by using distance sensors. When a distance sensor fails it will measure a distance zero, which is noted by the control unit. The skilled person will appreciate that, when any sensor which in principle measures continuously fails, this is recognizable as such.
Self-test capability is also obtained in yet another preferred embodiment by tracking in the control unit whether all sensors make a measurement within a determined relative measurement value when a train travels over the railway track. In the case one sensor deviates repeatedly, this sensor is designated by the system as a sensor to be checked/replaced.
According to yet another preferred embodiment, the distance sensors comprise an ultrasonic sensor and/or a radar and/or a laser. Such sensors have the advantage that the transmitter and receiver are housed in the same unit.
According to yet another preferred embodiment, the sensors are arranged above the railway track and their detection area extends downward in the direction of the track.
Arranging the sensors above the railway track has several advantages, including not being susceptible to vandalism. In addition, the sensors can be placed above the railway track without time-consuming excavation operations.
Sensors arranged on the cables above the railway track also provide the option of early detection of such a cable becoming detached, whereby the trains can be informed of this and it is possible to prevent kilometres of cable being pulled loose. This happens several times a year and the necessary repair operations can easily make the relevant route unusable for two days. Distance sensors which are arranged above the railway track and detect in downward direction therefore provide the system with a high degree of self-test capability.
Sensors which are arranged above the railway track and detect in downward direction are more likely to detect an object on the track than sensors which detect in a lying plane. This is because the height at which a sensor
detecting in a lying plane detects determines whether an object is detected or whether the sensor detects below or above the object. A downward viewing sensor is not
susceptible to this. According to yet another preferred embodiment, close to a level crossing additional sensors are arranged in the vicinity of the railway track and these additional sensors each cover a separate detection area of the level crossing so that objects blocking the railway track at the position of the level crossing can be detected by the system.
According to yet another preferred embodiment the mutual distance between the sensors close to the level crossing is a maximum of 2 metres. Objects from two metres in length can hereby be detected, including passenger cars blocking the railway track at the position of the level crossing.
The invention further relates to a method for localizing objects on a railway track, comprising the steps of:
- at least two sensors arranged in the vicinity of the railway track each covering a detection area of the railway track;
- the individual sensors transmitting an
identifiable warning signal to a control unit to which they are connected when the individual sensors detect an object in their detection area of the railway track;
- transmitting the same quantity measured by successive sensors as warning signal to the control unit;
- the control unit generating an alarm if the measurement data detected by the successive sensors comply with a predetermined condition; and
wherein the sensors are distance sensors and, in the case a distance reduction is detected by at least two successive sensors, the control unit assumes that there is an object on the railway track.
According to a preferred embodiment of the method, the sensors are arranged above the railway track, and their detection area extends downward in the direction of the railway track.
According to a preferred embodiment of the method, use is made of a system as described above.
Preferred embodiments of the present invention are further elucidated in the following description with reference to the drawing, in which:
Figure 1 shows a view of a train on a track provided with the system according to the invention;
Figure 2 shows a view of a carriage which has remained behind on the track provided with the system according to the invention; and
Figure 3 shows a top view of a level crossing.
Figure 1 shows a section of railway track 4 on which a train 21 is situated. Train 21 consists of a locomotive 22 and a carriage 24 drawn thereby. Situated above railway track 4 is an overhead line 26 on which sensors 8 are arranged at a constant mutual distance.
Sensors 8, which in the shown embodiment comprise ultrasonic sensors, preferably have non-overlapping
detection areas 10 extending downward from sensor 8 in the direction of railway track 4. Each unique sensor 8 thus covers a unique part of railway track 4 with its detection area 10.
When ultrasonic sensors 8 view an unoccupied railway track 4, they will detect a distance of for instance 5.5 metres. When however there is a train 21 or other object 2 under sensor 8, this sensor 8 suddenly detects a shorter distance. In the case there is a train 21 of 3 metres in height under sensor 8, this sensor 8 suddenly detects a distance of only 5.5 - 3 = 2.5 metres, and this unique sensor 8 transmits an identifiable warning signal to control unit 6. .When control unit 6 receives a corresponding signal from a predetermined number of successive sensors 8, control unit 6 assumes that there is an object 2 on the railway track.
Although the system can be applied within the current railway routes, which are divided into (rail) blocks, and can in such a case demonstrate occupancy of such a (rail) block, the system is expressly not limited to such block systems. It is after all possible, by means of identifiable warning signals received by control unit 6 and coming from unique sensors 8, to provide a very precise approximation of the location at which a train 21 or other object 2 is situated on a railway track 4.
Because control unit 6 receives identifiable warning signals from all sensors 8 under which object 2 is situated, such as locomotive 22 and carriage 24 in figure 1, control unit 6 is able to determine the length of a train 21.
In addition, the system is also suitable for detecting individual objects 2, such as for instance a *lost' carriage 24, on railway track 4 (figure 2).
As in ERTMS, a position determination is possible {figure 1), while 'lost' carriages 24 (figure 2) are also detected by the system. The system according to the
invention can therefore be used without - as is the case with ERTMS - an additional electrical track circuit or axle counter system having to be applied.
When a train 21 consisting of locomotive 22 and carriage 24 moves over a railway track 4, successive sensors 8 will detect an object 2. If the distance between
successive sensors 8 is known, in addition to the position determination it is also possible to determine the speed of train 21, and optionally even the acceleration or
deceleration thereof. Because information concerning the position and speed of train 21 is known, the system provides the
possibility, when a train 21 approaches a level crossing 16, of controlling barriers 20 in dynamic manner.
In the present systems use is made at a level crossing 16 of the permitted travel speed of a train 21 on the specific route on which level crossing 16 is situated. A sensor (not shown) is arranged at a predetermined distance corresponding to twenty-one seconds travel time to the railway crossing at the permitted travel speed. When this sensor detects an approaching train 21, barriers 20 of level crossing 16 are closed. When train 21 is travelling more slowly than the permitted travel speed, barriers 20 are also closed at the same distance between train 21 and level crossing 16, although because of the lower speed the train 21 will take longer than twenty-one seconds to travel this distance. If a train 21 travels at half the permitted speed, the waiting time is as much as forty-two seconds.
Because the position, the direction of movement and the speed of train 21 are known according to the system, control unit 6 can precisely determine when train 21 will pass level crossing 16. Barriers 20 can therefore be controlled in dynamic manner, i.e. subject to the travel speed of train 21, whereby the waiting times for traffic 18 crossing railway track 4 are minimized. Traffic flow is hereby enhanced and unsafe situations arising from impatient road users are prevented.
According to a preferred embodiment the system is further expanded with additional sensors 12 which are situated close to level crossing 16, close to the lane of crossing traffic 18. In the unlikely event a car 18 comes to a stop on level crossing 16 and blocks railway track 4, this object 2 is detected by the additional sensors 12 and control unit 6 will intervene and cause the train 21 approaching level crossing 16 to make an automatic emergency stop.
In the case of a warning signal coming from sensors 8, 12 associated with a level crossing 16 control unit 6 can, if desired, already assume when there are a smaller number of sensors 8, 12 that an object 2, 18 is situated on railway track 4 at level crossing 16 and take suitable measures. When for instance a detection by only two sensors 8, 12 suffices, smaller objects 2 can then also be detected.
It is noted that the system according to the invention is also suitable for detecting objects 2 other than a train 21 or a carriage 24 on railway track 4.
In summary, the system according to the invention provides, among others, the following advantages:
- a semi-continuous detection of objects 2 on the track, wherein these objects 2 are not limited to train (sections) ;
- a technical solution wherein components close to or on rails 28 are unnecessary;
- a technical solution wherein electrical insulation of individual blocks is unnecessary;
- a system which is not susceptible to
electromagnetic compatibility;
- a system which is not susceptible to weather influences, such as falling leaves and storms;
- a system which is not susceptible to rust formation on rails 28;
- a system which imposes only few requirements on (new) trains 21 so as to be detectable by the system, whereby rail machinery with small wheel size can for instance also be detected; - lower energy consumption in the order of magnitude of 50 W/km, while the block system uses about 250 W/km;
- low implementation costs in that sensors 8, 12 can be arranged on the existing overhead line and no additional excavation operations are required per sensor;
- a system which makes manual resets of a (rail) block unnecessary;
- a system which is self-starting and quickly operational again after a brief failure due to malfunction;
- a self-testing system;
- a system wherein sensors 8, 12 can be checked, replaced or repaired at a quiet moment suitable for the purpose;
- a reliable system not susceptible to malfunction; - a system which, in addition to occupancy of a
(rail) block, can also make an accurate approximation of position and speed of the train traffic;
- a system which enables dynamic control of level crossings;
- a system which can also detect objects 2 other than trains 21, such as a car 18 which is blocking a level crossing 16, and thereby provides increased safety;
- a system which, like ERTMS , transmits the length of rail vehicle 21 but can also continue to continuously monitor this length and even detects ^lost' carriages, whereby an additional electrical track circuit or axle counter system is unnecessary; and
- a system which can serve as full backup when the current ERTMS fails.
Although they show preferred embodiments of the invention, the above described embodiments are intended only to illustrate the present invention and not in any way to limit the specification of the invention. The scope of the invention is therefore defined solely by the following claims .

Claims

Claims
1. System for localizing objects on a railway track, comprising :
- at least two sensors which are arranged in the vicinity of the railway track and each cover a separate detection area of the railway track;
- a control unit which is connected to each of the sensors and receives an identifiable warning signal from the individual sensors when they detect an object in their detection area of the railway track;
- wherein the successive sensors measure and transmit the same quantity to the control unit as warning signal; and
- wherein the control unit generates an alarm if the measurement data detected by the successive sensors comply with a predetermined condition; and
- wherein the sensors are distance sensors and, in the case a distance reduction is detected by at least two successive sensors, the control unit assumes that there is an object on the railway track.
2. System as claimed in claim 1, wherein the sensors are arranged such that their measuring direction is oriented transversely of the railway track.
3. System as claimed in any of the foregoing claims, wherein the control unit assumes that there is an object on the railway track when a warning signal is received from at least three successive sensors.
4. System as claimed in any of the foregoing claims, wherein the sensors are arranged at some mutual distance in longitudinal direction of the railway track.
5. System as claimed in any of the foregoing claims, wherein successive sensors are arranged at a distance of a minimum of two metres, more preferably at a distance of about four metres, from each other.
6. System as claimed in any of the foregoing claims, wherein the sensors are arranged over substantially the whole length of the railway track.
7. System as claimed in any of the foregoing claims, wherein the detection areas i lonitored by the sensors are separate areas which have no overlap.
8. System as claimed in claim 7, wherein the distance sensors comprise an ultrasonic sensor and/or a radar and/or a laser.
9. System as claimed in any of the foregoing claims, wherein the sensors are arranged above the railway track and their detection area extends downward in the direction of the railway track.
10. System as claimed in any of the foregoing claims, wherein close to a level crossing additional sensors are arranged in the vicinity of the railway track which each cover a separate detection area of the level crossing, so that objects blocking the railway track at the position of the level crossing can be detected by the system.
11. System as claimed in claim 10, wherein the mutual distance between the sensors close to the level crossing is a maximum of 2 metres.
12. Method for localizing objects on a railway track, comprising the steps of:
- at least two sensors arranged in the vicinity of the railway track each covering a detection area of the railway track;
- the individual sensors transmitting an
identifiable warning signal to a control unit to which they are connected when the individual sensors detect an object in their detection area of the railway track;
- transmitting the same quantity measured by successive sensors as warning signal to the control unit; and
- the control unit generating an alarm if the measurement data detected by the successive sensors comply with a predetermined condition; and
wherein the sensors are distance sensors and, in the case a distance reduction is detected by at least two successive sensors, the control unit assumes that there is an object on the railway track.
13. Method as claimed in claim 12, wherein the sensors are arranged above the railway track, and their detection area extends downward in the direction of the railway track.
14. Method as claimed in claim 12 or 13, wherein a system according to any of the claims 1-11 is applied.
EP11729182.3A 2010-06-22 2011-06-22 System and method for localizing objects on a railway track Not-in-force EP2585353B1 (en)

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
NL2004944A NL2004944C2 (en) 2010-06-22 2010-06-22 SYSTEM FOR LOCALIZING OBJECTS ON A RAILWAY, AND METHOD FOR THIS.
PCT/NL2011/050451 WO2011162605A2 (en) 2010-06-22 2011-06-22 System for localizing objects on a railway track, and method therefor

Publications (2)

Publication Number Publication Date
EP2585353A2 true EP2585353A2 (en) 2013-05-01
EP2585353B1 EP2585353B1 (en) 2017-08-09

Family

ID=43529981

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
EP11729182.3A Not-in-force EP2585353B1 (en) 2010-06-22 2011-06-22 System and method for localizing objects on a railway track

Country Status (3)

Country Link
EP (1) EP2585353B1 (en)
NL (1) NL2004944C2 (en)
WO (1) WO2011162605A2 (en)

Families Citing this family (12)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
JP6225362B2 (en) * 2013-11-11 2017-11-08 株式会社明電舎 Train self-position estimation device
US9434397B2 (en) * 2014-08-05 2016-09-06 Panasec Corporation Positive train control system and apparatus therefor
CN105204496B (en) * 2015-09-25 2018-01-12 清华大学 The method and system of EMUs air brake control system sensor fault diagnosis
EP3275764B1 (en) 2016-07-28 2020-10-14 Max Räz Train guide system
US10501102B2 (en) 2017-02-06 2019-12-10 Avante International Technology, Inc. Positive train control system and apparatus employing RFID devices
CN108974052B (en) * 2017-06-01 2020-02-21 比亚迪股份有限公司 Vehicle positioning system and method
GB2572187B (en) 2018-03-22 2021-09-01 Siemens Mobility Ltd Sensor unit for detecting the approach of a train
DE102018206299A1 (en) * 2018-04-24 2019-10-24 Siemens Mobility GmbH Method for controlling a level crossing and path control arrangement
CN109131444A (en) * 2018-08-31 2019-01-04 华南理工大学 Foreign body intelligence detection device in a kind of underground railway track section
US10953899B2 (en) 2018-11-15 2021-03-23 Avante International Technology, Inc. Image-based monitoring and detection of track/rail faults
IT201900010509A1 (en) * 2019-07-01 2021-01-01 P A L Italia S R L Device for detecting the passage, along an electrified overhead line, of a pantograph sliding on it
CN113815680A (en) * 2021-09-16 2021-12-21 宁夏大学 Railway track sand burying detection system and early warning method

Family Cites Families (11)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE2136703C3 (en) * 1971-07-22 1975-03-20 Siemens Ag, 1000 Berlin Und 8000 Muenchen Arrangement for the automatic monitoring of danger areas
FR2192345B1 (en) * 1972-07-07 1975-08-29 Thomson Csf
DE2814348C3 (en) * 1978-04-03 1986-02-13 Siemens AG, 1000 Berlin und 8000 München Orientation device for a track-bound vehicle
DE29724276U1 (en) * 1997-09-06 2000-09-07 EE-Signals GmbH & Co. KG, 91236 Alfeld Traffic warning detector
ATE240528T1 (en) * 1998-09-24 2003-05-15 Vossloh System Technik Karlsfe METHOD AND DEVICE FOR INFORMING PASSENGERS OF A TRAIN
DE20206926U1 (en) * 2002-05-01 2002-08-08 Ludwig, Peter, 90513 Zirndorf Monitoring system for optoelectronic control of train station danger areas
US7196636B2 (en) * 2004-02-24 2007-03-27 Graham Kevin M Railroad crossing warning system
US7715276B2 (en) * 2006-05-09 2010-05-11 Sensotech Inc. Presence detection system for path crossing
DE102007035916A1 (en) * 2007-07-30 2009-02-05 Siemens Ag Zugpositionserfassungssystem
DE102007049248B4 (en) * 2007-10-12 2013-07-04 Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V. Method for determining the position of a rail vehicle
EP2151364B1 (en) * 2008-08-06 2012-08-29 Siemens Schweiz AG Method and device for securing an automatic, signal-controlled level crossing

Non-Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
See references of WO2011162605A2 *

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
WO2011162605A2 (en) 2011-12-29
EP2585353B1 (en) 2017-08-09
WO2011162605A3 (en) 2012-02-16
NL2004944C2 (en) 2011-12-27

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
EP2585353B1 (en) System and method for localizing objects on a railway track
US20230192164A1 (en) Rail Vehicle Signal Enforcement and Separation Control
US9469198B2 (en) System and method for identifying damaged sections of a route
US9834237B2 (en) Route examining system and method
WO2020021282A1 (en) Determining position of a vehicle on a rail
CN106715234A (en) System and method for avoiding a collision for a vehicle
US10501100B2 (en) Route examining system
KR20140069063A (en) Method and system for determining the availability of a lane for a guided vehicle
US9481385B2 (en) Systems and methods for predictive maintenance of crossings
JP2006320139A (en) Vehicle braking method and vehicle braking system
WO2016149064A1 (en) Vehicle control system and method
CN216467864U (en) Railway monitoring system
US11358618B2 (en) Crossing obstruction detection system
CN113859331A (en) Railway monitoring system and monitoring method thereof
AU2011308097B2 (en) A railroad track inspection vehicle
US20080149782A1 (en) Wheel detection and classification system for railroad data network
WO2013170307A1 (en) Vehicle detection system
CN113415318B (en) Train coupling marshalling auxiliary protection system and protection method
JP2010012932A (en) Train monitoring system
Burdzik et al. Analysis of the detection and crossing signaling system in safety terms
JP2003054411A (en) Method and device for detecting approach of train
JP2010233344A (en) On-vehicle braking control system and on-vehicle braking control method
CA2242723C (en) Railway hazard acoustic sensing, locating, and alarm system
CN113715882A (en) Method for detecting barrier at railway crossing
RU2770322C1 (en) Device for determining the derailment of wheel pairs of rolling stock or a dragging metal part and a sensor for monitoring the obliquity of rolling stock

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
PUAI Public reference made under article 153(3) epc to a published international application that has entered the european phase

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009012

17P Request for examination filed

Effective date: 20130122

AK Designated contracting states

Kind code of ref document: A2

Designated state(s): AL AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MC MK MT NL NO PL PT RO RS SE SI SK SM TR

DAX Request for extension of the european patent (deleted)
GRAP Despatch of communication of intention to grant a patent

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSNIGR1

STAA Information on the status of an ep patent application or granted ep patent

Free format text: STATUS: GRANT OF PATENT IS INTENDED

INTG Intention to grant announced

Effective date: 20170410

GRAS Grant fee paid

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: EPIDOSNIGR3

GRAA (expected) grant

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009210

STAA Information on the status of an ep patent application or granted ep patent

Free format text: STATUS: THE PATENT HAS BEEN GRANTED

AK Designated contracting states

Kind code of ref document: B1

Designated state(s): AL AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MC MK MT NL NO PL PT RO RS SE SI SK SM TR

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: GB

Ref legal event code: FG4D

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: CH

Ref legal event code: EP

Ref country code: AT

Ref legal event code: REF

Ref document number: 916457

Country of ref document: AT

Kind code of ref document: T

Effective date: 20170815

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: IE

Ref legal event code: FG4D

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: R096

Ref document number: 602011040386

Country of ref document: DE

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: NL

Ref legal event code: FP

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: LT

Ref legal event code: MG4D

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: AT

Ref legal event code: MK05

Ref document number: 916457

Country of ref document: AT

Kind code of ref document: T

Effective date: 20170809

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: LT

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: NO

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20171109

Ref country code: AT

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: FI

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: HR

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: SE

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: RS

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: LV

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: PL

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: GR

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20171110

Ref country code: IS

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20171209

Ref country code: BG

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20171109

Ref country code: ES

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: DK

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: RO

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: CZ

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: R097

Ref document number: 602011040386

Country of ref document: DE

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: SM

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: IT

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: SK

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: EE

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

PLBE No opposition filed within time limit

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009261

STAA Information on the status of an ep patent application or granted ep patent

Free format text: STATUS: NO OPPOSITION FILED WITHIN TIME LIMIT

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: FR

Ref legal event code: PLFP

Year of fee payment: 8

26N No opposition filed

Effective date: 20180511

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: SI

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: CH

Ref legal event code: PL

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: IE

Ref legal event code: MM4A

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: MC

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: LU

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20180622

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: IE

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20180622

Ref country code: LI

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20180630

Ref country code: CH

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20180630

PGFP Annual fee paid to national office [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: BE

Payment date: 20190627

Year of fee payment: 9

Ref country code: FR

Payment date: 20190625

Year of fee payment: 9

PGFP Annual fee paid to national office [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: NL

Payment date: 20190619

Year of fee payment: 15

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: MT

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20180622

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: TR

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: PT

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: HU

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT; INVALID AB INITIO

Effective date: 20110622

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: CY

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

Ref country code: MK

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20170809

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: AL

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TRANSLATION OF THE DESCRIPTION OR TO PAY THE FEE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME-LIMIT

Effective date: 20170809

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: NL

Ref legal event code: MM

Effective date: 20200701

GBPC Gb: european patent ceased through non-payment of renewal fee

Effective date: 20200622

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: BE

Ref legal event code: MM

Effective date: 20200630

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: FR

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20200630

Ref country code: GB

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20200622

Ref country code: NL

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20200701

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: BE

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20200630

PGFP Annual fee paid to national office [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: DE

Payment date: 20210629

Year of fee payment: 11

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: R119

Ref document number: 602011040386

Country of ref document: DE

PG25 Lapsed in a contracting state [announced via postgrant information from national office to epo]

Ref country code: DE

Free format text: LAPSE BECAUSE OF NON-PAYMENT OF DUE FEES

Effective date: 20230103