Alarm Control Systems at Railway Level Crossing Junctions - Research Proposal Example

ALARM CONTROL SYSTEMS AT RAILWAY CROSSING JUNCTIONS By Student’s name Course code and name Professor’s name University name City, State Date of submission Executive Summary Accidents occurrence at level crossings remains an issue of concern to the modern world. This article highlights a circuit solution specifically tailored for controlling alarm systems with a failsafe mode in order to resolve issues that have been arising from the failure of alarm notification systems. The methodology of approach deploys patented solutions which are slightly modified to solve this problem. It is recommended that the failsafe mechanism be incorporated in all alarm control systems as an approach towards solving of this problem. Introduction Road safety at level crossings still remain an issue of concern in the modern world 200 years after the inception of railways. It has been established that level crossing safety has continued to be compromised due to road drivers’ negligence. The potential danger that level crossings pose to the road users is not emphasized due to the unawareness that a train could be coming from the other side of the rail any time. Comparing level crossing to a train station that is full of action level crossing pose danger to human life and other forms of destruction due to complacency. Late detection has also been questioned due to the errors that arise from critical alarm failures and many other forms of undocumented failures. In order to make sound decisions prior to crossing at a level crossing, drivers are provided with road signs that are dedicated towards this form of notification. This report however dwells on the electronic form of notification (digital alarm) in order to deal with this road ordeal. The circuit is designed to show the uniqueness that should be instilled in the new system that is meant to curb accidents at level crossing. Research The existing alarm notification systems are meant to raise an alarm once the train is within the proximity of the sensors. This does not offer an integrated approach through a multifaceted system approach to ensure a failsafe system. According to Khoudour, et al. (2008) in a study meant to reduce the incidences faced by level crossing in the European Union region, it was established that some of the human causes of accidents at level crossing are due to distracted blindness in which absence of attention leads to failure to perceive an oncoming object. This has also been a cause of accident for most road users thus it is also expected for the level crossings too. Road users tend to have expectation based mentality to an extent that they fail to respond in way to protect themselves against the manifesting environment. Further to the two causes of level accidents above, it has also been established that perceptual limitations gather the majority of information than visual systems. Speed and distance perception has also been raised as the main issue that is associated with level crossing accidents. Tinakaras (2014) affirms to the distance and accuracy issue stating that, accurate decision making when it comes to level crossing is affected greatly due to the complex perceptual process that involves two moving objects that are expected to converge at a given point. Research carried out by Wilson (2007) identified some of the advanced technology tools that are possible solutions to the road safety at railway crossings such as video imaging, object detection, advanced wireless communication systems for both trains and road vehicles. This study acts as a stepping stone to the development of advanced alarm notification systems that shall be implemented to the best of the entire transport community. In order to succeed in controlling the rising number of accidents, there is need to start by solving the attention deficiency issue first. Alarms developed to respond on a timely basis are best solution for this problem. They should further be incorporated with other visual aids and barriers that prevent drivers from crossing no matter the distance to be covered by the train. Methodology The methodology deployed by this study is based on tried methods thus this is not a trial and era approach. Level crossing systems are subdivided into two major groups which are broadly classified into two groups namely; active level crossing and passive level crossing. Active level crossing are furnished with warning systems that are either manual or automatic depending on the nature of operation. Alarm control systems which are suggested in this study may be manual or automatic depending on the level of activities that are carried out within a given area. Figure 1: Classification of notification systems. In order to come up with the most effective alarm control system this research shall depend on already patented theoretical material in order to come up with a workable solution for the problem that is being considered by this report. As such the intended level crossing alarm control system solution shall resemble the one designed by Geiger (1976). The only feature that shall be improved is the notification systems as advanced alarm systems have been designed to fit this purpose. The transmitter circuit shall be drawn to reflect a failsafe system that is intended to be fitted to the alarm system. The following section gives a breakdown of the transmitter design that will operate in low voltage environment such as PV power systems. Figure 3: Logic diagram for a failsafe alarm control system to be developed (Author, 2014). Developed Solution The developed level crossing solution is meant to discover a forthcoming train using system tie points that are modulated using an alternating current carrier wave signal. This is done by attenuating the variable shunt with effect to the oncoming train as a monitoring device to check the varying signals. The signal relay is hence dropped when the variations are sufficient thereby ending up triggering the alarm. This system may also be integrated with other notification systems such as visual and barrier gates which should be erected on either side of the roads that are crossing railways to bar any vehicles from crossing the level once the systems are triggered (Geiger, 1976). The oncoming train signal is propagated automatically through an active involvement of the voltage window. The latch feature that is included in the control system precludes pickup of signal relay once the rail is broken and high impedance ballast. This system then resets itself via a time delay circuit that is meant for low signal detection in order to allow for pickup of signal once relative motion is detected from either side of the rail. A bypass circuit is also designed for this alarm control system as a collection point for any detected motion. This acts as a failsafe mechanism to detect signal even if shunt failure occurs during the monitoring process (Geiger, 1976). The circuit diagram shown below gives the general layout of the suggested alarm control system. From the circuit diagram below, the railway signal system 1 is excited by the signal generated in transmitter 2 which is also applied to rail 3. The railway signal received by system signal 1 is relayed in form of direct current which indicates the first positive and the second zero to both signal outputs. The track signal generator ensures that the wave signal is transmitted to the reed oscillator 24. This signal is amplified and combined then sent to the pulser 32 then back to the sensitivity control 30. The pulser is made up of unijunction transistor oscillating circuit which operates the diode gate. The light emitting diode 33 is pulsed depending on the alternating current frequency at pulser 32. This is also determined by the isolation capacitors and coupler 5 which includes the impedance of the surge protection circuits to be included. Connecting jumpers 17 and 21 gives an automatic gain that in turn monitors gain control at 20. This arrangement hence offers a great sensitivity due to the interlinked systems for the purpose of rendering it as a failsafe system. The accurate response is then sent to the gain control 20 thereby depicting the accurate speed of the train and time at which the alarm should be triggered. The circuit is disabled if the rail detector 28 is broken thereby triggering hexagonal input 27 and off the alarm goes. The signal information is relayed via lines 34, 35 and 36 for execution at the alarm end (Geiger, 1976). Figure 2: Circuit diagram. Tests The solution indicated above shall work as a level crossing solution that is tailored for remote environments. This circuit shall work as a control system for alarms to be raised in the event of an oncoming train. The tests that shall be carried out through simulation using JavaScript programming in order to show how it shall work. Once the timings are established, the circuit board has to be tested using the manual visual inspection (MVI) then the in-circuit test (ICT). The functionality test (FT) shall set in if the in-circuit test fails for purposes of final verification. This sequence is preferred due to the fault coverage intensity that is raised from this procedure. Figure 3: A series of test procedures to be carried out on the designed circuit (Oresjo, 2007). Conclusion This study aimed at coming up with a solution that if executed shall reduce the rate of accidents at the level crossing points. This solution is a failsafe control system for level crossing alarms that can also be utilised as a control for other measures implemented for accident reduction such as barrier gates and warning lights. This system is going to be tested by a series of procedures ranging from simulations to in-circuit test fail checks. If fully implemented, this solution is going to be key in accident reduction caused at level crossings. List of References Geiger, W. L., 1976. Railway Signal System. United States, Patent No. 3,987,989. Khoudour, L. et al., 2008. Towards safer level crossings: existing recommendations, new applicable technologies and a proposed simulation model. European Conference of Transport Research Institutes (ECTRI), Volume 1, pp. 1-11. Oresjo, S., 2007. A new test strategy for complex printed circuit board assemblies, London: Agilent Technologies, Inc.. Tinakaras, 2014. The next generation of railway level crossing safety technology. [Online] Available at: http://informatransport.wordpress.com/2014/02/13/the-next-generation-of-railway-level-crossing-safety-technology/ [Accessed 26 May 2014]. Wilson, J. R., 2007. People and Rail Systems: Human Factors at the Heart of the Railway. 1 ed. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.. Read More