IEEE WG9 Meeting 11

 

Date:            July 21, 2000

Location:          BAH (Washington, DC)

Attendees:

Name

Company

Tel

Fax

E-Mail

Thomas McGean

IEEE RTVISC

757-789-5166

757-789-5167

t.j.mcgean@ieee.org

Robert McHugh

BCRTA

604-520-3641

604-521-2818

rob_mchugh@bcrtc.bc.ca

David Phelps

APTA

202-898-4086

202-863-4019

dphelps@apta.com

Karl Berger

BAH

703-247-6543

202-628-0333

berger_karl@bah.com

Kevin Koncak

BAH

703-247-6595

 

koncak_kevin@bah.com

James Lyke

LTK

215-641-8871

215-654-9370

jlyke@ltk.com

James Kemp

NJT

973-491-7861

973-491-7837

jkemp@njtransit.com

Pierre Zuber

Adtranz

412-655-5479

412-655-5108

pierre.zuber@us.adtranz.com

Michael Barnett

MUNI

415-337-2245

 

mike_barnett@ci.sf.ca.us

Frederick Woolsey

LTK

215-641-8865

215-654-9370

fwoolsey@ltk.com

 

 

1.               Purpose

See attached agenda.

2.               Introduction

 

3.               Discussion

a.              Tom McGean- Report on WG2 (CBTC) views regarding non safety-related TWC data.  Dr. Rumsey expressed some concerns at the RTVISC meeting in Piscataway regarding interface to CBTC.  WG2 will take this up at their next meeting next week.  No one has volunteered to date to take on the new TWC working group chair.

Pierre Zuber expressed his concern over mixing CBTC (“vital”) data with non-vital data.  Tom McGean pointed out that there is some overlap with ATS information that CBTC will handle.  Pierre also brought up the differing bandwidth considerations for the two different data uses.  Non-safety TWC needs a much larger bandwidth.  Mike Barnett expressed his agreement with Pierre’s position.

It was agreed that there was a clear need for the respective working groups to talk.  Rob McHugh stated that Skytrain had decided on a recent procurement to use a totally separate system.

b.              Fred Woolsey- TWC WG 15.  Fred Woolsey brought up the question of whether the proposed WG15 should tackle data elements or just protocol.  Tom McGean expressed his opinion that only the protocol should be tackled; data elements should be the responsibility of WG9.  Dave Phelps expressed his agreement.  It was agreed that the TCIP data elements would be the basis for this.

It was agreed that only the protocol would be covered by WG15; data elements would be the responsibility of WG9.  Coordination with other groups that may define data elements will be necessary.  Relevance to the ITS data registry was discussed.  Tom McGean stated that data strictly within the rail world does not have to go to this database, only highway-rail interface data.

There was some additional discussion of the ITS registry and its characteristics.

c.               Tom McGean- Gateway proposal.  Tom McGean informed the WG that APTA had agreed to sponsor this w/o gov’t funding.  Interested companies were ALSTOM, Bombardier, WABCO, and NJT.  Groups that were not interested were Siemens, Adtranz, US&S, and BART.  The lack of interest on the part of Adtranz and Siemens was seen as a fatal flaw.  The organizing meeting at Piscataway was then canceled, but NJT expressed interest in the project.  Jim Kemp then explained as follows.  NJT wants to have a standard implementation of the new technology going in on their new equipment.  Future procurements are also a concern.  NJT has an approved capital program, with funding, to develop this standard gateway.  NJT could therefore support WG9 and the gateway implementation.  Jim Kemp also asked what the significance of “clean room” was.  NJT understands that this means the solution would not be proprietary.  Tom McGean agreed, basically.  Jim Kemp stated, however, that there is something in the original proposal NJT did not like- that is, Bombardier’s desire to develop all the development tools themselves.  NJT prefers that existing tools be made available for use by others.

Tom McGean stated that the next step would have to be to get the principals together and discuss the best way of implementing this.

Pierre Zuber raised the following question: is NJT going to put on the open market what ALSTOM and Adtranz are providing to NJT?  Tom McGean stated that Adtranz (Ron Lawrence) had said that they wanted to put the TCN engineering in the public domain but didn’t want to expend any more effort without compensation.  Jim Kemp said that NJT is not going to make proprietary information public.

Fred Woolsey asked when the principals could get together to discuss this in detail.  It was agreed that the group would agree today when this would happen.  (Note: this was not done due to unavailability of key NJT representatives by phone.)

d.              Karl Berger- WMATA LonWorks.  See handout.

e.              Discussion of WG issues tracking.  Mike Barnett brought up the problem of tracking issues and disseminating the info to the members of the WG.  Alternatives were discussed.  It was agreed that a combination of a discussion group with a Listserv to notify of new postings would be a good idea.  Mike Barnett agreed to look into this.

f.                Rob McHugh- Database design strategy.  See handout.

g.              Fred Woolsey- Draft integrated database.  There was a spirited discussion of the draft database.  It was agreed that several changes would be made to the database, as follows:

·                 The database should be segmented into separate tables.

·                 The field “Description” should be renamed “Long Name.”

·                 “Timeliness” should be less specific; say, a time criticality level rather than a precise time interval.

·                 Ensure all ranges are in SI units.

·                 Numerical range and units should be separate fields.

h.               Dave Phelps and Jim Lyke- R142 vs. IEEE 1475.  Dave Phelps stated that the disagreements are few.  These were then discussed in detail.  Discrepancies were identified in the following areas:

·                 Power-brake mode.

·                 Master controller encoder values.  It was agreed that it might be better to express this as a percentage.

·                 No-motion.

In summary, R142/R142A and IEEE 1475 are substantially in agreement.

i.                 Review process for data element database (see action items)

j.                 Tom McGean- balloting rights.  The full RTVISC committee has the right to delegate balloting to the WG itself.  Tom McGean thinks the expertise lies in the WG rather than the full committee, and that the WG should vote today to ask for balloting rights.  Those on the full committee who wish to vote can petition the WG to have balloting rights.

The motion was passed unanimously.

k.               Wrap-Up

·                 LonMark meeting- 10/23/00 at US&S in Pittsburgh.

·                 Next RTVISC meeting- 10/24-25/00 at US&S in Pittsburgh.  All WG9 members are invited.

·                 Next WG9 meeting- 10/26/00 at Adtranz in Pittsburgh.

4.               Action Items

·                 Mike Barnett to look into WG9 issues tracking.

·                 Dave Phelps to send an e-mail to members re: “Mind It” URL change tracking software.

·                 Fred Woolsey to develop list of criticality levels for timeliness- 3 or 4- life critical to “who cares.”

·                 Pierre Zuber to look at database fields to confirm that the included fields are adequate to define data for TCN by 8/15/00.

·                 Jeremy Roberts to look at database fields to confirm that the included fields are adequate to define data for LonWorks by 8/15/00.

·                 Fred Woolsey to put together a review form for database comments.

·                 Dave Phelps to send Fred Woolsey review form used by APTA PRESS committee.

·                 Jim Lyke to assist Fred Woolsey in filling out the database.

·                 John Ewing to look at locomotive hauled data elements.

·                 Dave Phelps to verify that all applicable IEEE 1475 data elements are accounted for.

·                 Fred Woolsey to prepare revised project scope for revised PAR.

Attachments:

·       Agenda

·       WMATA LonWorks handout

·       Database handout

·       Draft database document

·       IEEE 1475/R142 Data Element comparison