| Summary: | [Objective] To meet increasing urban rail transit capacity demands, traditional CBTC (communication-based train control) signaling systems-with ground-based interlocking as core architecture-are evolving toward TACS (train autonomous circumnavigation system) with vehicle-wayside interlocking architecture. It is essential to evaluate degradation impacts resulting from failures in TACS core components. [Method] Based on the distinct architectures and functional characteristics of TACS and CBTC systems, from the failure scenarios of their core subsystems, the degradation impacts of each system due to the core module failures are examined and compared. [Result & Conclusion] The core equipment in TACS employ hardware architectures with enhanced redundancy technology, demonstrating higher overall reliability than CBTC system. Compared to functionally similar CI (computer interlocking) and LC (line controller) subsystems in CBTC, while failures in TACS WRC (wayside resource controller) and WTC (wayside train controller) subsystems cause less degradation impacts. Following wheel slipping incidents, TACS exhibits less degradation impact, higher recovery efficiency, and greater automation level throughout the process versus CBTC. Degradation impacts from CC (carbornes computer) or OC (onboard controller) failures in TACS system are comparable to those of equivalent equipment failures in CBTC system. In the case of vehicle-wayside wireless communication network failure, from the perspective of train operational efficiency, TACS is equivalent to CBTC system without spot mode, but showing lower performance compared to CBTC system with spot mode.
|
|---|
