4 IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 19, NO.
1, JANUARY 1, 2019
Onboard Condition Monitoring Sensors, Systems
and Techniques for Freight Railway
Vehicles: A Review
Esteban Bernal , Maksym Spiryagin, and Colin Cole
Abstract— Given the constant demand for heavier, longer,
faster, and more efficient rail freight vehicles, onboard fault
detection systems appear as a good approach for enhanced rail-
way asset exploitation. Real-time condition monitoring reduces
inefficient preventive and reactive maintenance actions, decreases
waste from replacing parts that still have a useful life, and
improves availability and safety by real-time rolling stock diagno-
sis. There have been considerable advances in wayside monitoring
applications, but these cannot achieve real-time continuous mon-
itoring. With the price reduction and miniaturization trends of
electronic devices, the cost of deploying wireless sensor networks
onboard freight trains continues to become more feasible and
accessible. On the other hand, the lack of onboard electric power
availability on freight wagons appears as the major limitation
for the implementation of these technologies. This paper reviews
recent onboard condition monitoring sensors, systems, methods
and techniques, aiming to define the present state of the art
and its potential application for freight wagons without onboard
electric power.
Index Terms— Condition monitoring, energy harvesting, fault
detection, freight, literature review, maintenance, onboard, rail-
way engineering, railway safety, sensor-node, wagon, wireless
sensor network.
I. I NTRODUCTION
R AIILWAY freight transport performance in Europe has
constantly increased during the last few years, and it
is expected to reach 3460 Bn tkm per year by 2030 [1].
In Australia, rail freight increased by 50% from 2006 to
2014, and it is expected to grow a further 26% by 2026.
Railway freight is in general, the most efficient transport
means for large tonnages of heavy cargo. Furthermore, rail
freight transport produces 93% less carbon emissions and 94%
less accident events compared to road freight transport per ton-
kilometer. In Australia for example, a single freight train can
remove 110 trucks from the roads [2].
Despite efforts of railway operators, derailments still occur.
Even though there have been great advances in wayside con-
Manuscript received September 20, 2018; accepted October 7, 2018. Date
of publication October 10, 2018; date of current version December 7, 2018.
This work was supported by the Rail Manufacturing Cooperative Research
Centre (RMCRC) funded jointly by participating rail organizations and the
Australian Federal Government’s Business Cooperative Research Centres Pro-
gram through Project R1.7.2-“Smart Axle Transducer Transmitter for Freight
Wagon Condition Monitoring Systems.” The associate editor coordinating the
review of this paper and approving it for publication was Dr. Ying Zhang.
(Corresponding author: Esteban Bernal.)
The authors are with the Centre for Railway Engineering, Central
Queensland University, Rockhampton, QLD 4702, Australia (e-mail:
e.bernalarango@cqu.edu.au).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/JSEN.2018.2875160
1558-1748 © 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
dition monitoring, these systems have not reached the desired
level of performance [3], and are not capable of performing
continuous real-time monitoring. Even with over 6000 wayside
hot-box detectors deployed in the USA, overheated bearings
caused 119 derailments in the USA and Canada during
2010 – 2016 [4]. Trains running on the Australian railway
network are also monitored by wayside equipment such as
Wheel Impact Load Detectors (WILD), hot-box detectors,
acoustic bearing fault detectors, etc. [5]. Nonetheless, there
were 30 freight train derailment events in Australia (excluding
Queensland) during the 2016 – 2017 financial year, and an
average of 30.6 per year for the last 5 years [6]. Hence, there
are still opportunities for improving current vehicle fault and
derailment detection systems.
Freight train derailments are more frequent than passenger
train derailments (3.75 to 1), but generally have less conse-
quences in terms of numbers of people exposed to harm [6].
Nevertheless, freight trains may run for many kilometers with
derailed bogies undetected, causing severe damage to the
infrastructure [6]. A specific study for train derailment causes
in Australia established an average line closure of 64 hours per
derailment, and two identified derailments held the railway
closed for 7 days [7]. According to the European Railway
Agency, freight derailments in that region have a social and
financial impact exceeding 200 million Euros each year [8].
In the European context, rolling stock is responsible for 38%
of the derailment events [9]. In Australia this percentage is
lower but still significant. Onboard condition monitoring is
not yet widely spread in unpowered freight railway vehicles,
and its implementation would be expected to improve safety
and reliability in freight railway transport systems.
Condition based maintenance (CBM) has proven to be an
effective strategy for getting more profit from an asset [10].
In the case of freight trains, this approach may improve safety
and availability by enabling early detection of component
faults. CBM may extend the lifetimes of components and
reduce machinery downtimes. It also allows operators to get
the most out of every replaceable part in a specific oper-
ating condition. The parts are not replaced on the basis of
calendar schedule, operation time or failure, but when the
monitored part reaches a predetermined condition indicat-
ing it has to be replaced. During its lifetime, a component
experiences a unique combination of loading cycles, weather,
downtimes, etc. Condition monitoring enables operators to
execute a unique part replacement schedule that guarantees
BERNAL et al.: ONBOARD CONDITION MONITORING SENSORS, SYSTEMS AND TECHNIQUES: A REVIEW
the maximum profit for each part under its specific operating
conditions.
For enabling a comprehensive condition based maintenance
approach, it is necessary to have real-time component diag-
nosis; hence it is necessary to install sensors, data loggers,
and transmitters. The data must then be analyzed to iden-
tify or predict a potential fault. For railway systems, rolling
stock and track are the assets requiring significant levels
of maintenance actions. Given the high cost of equipment
for condition monitoring, technology is normally installed
in the opposite asset category relative to the parts being
measured. Hence moving (onboard the train) equipment is
used to monitor static assets (rails, switches, etc.), while static
equipment (at the track wayside) is used to monitor moving
assets (wheel profiles, axles, bearings, etc.). This results in
maximizing the efficiency of the condition monitoring system
itself because it allows a single data acquisition and logging
point to diagnose a great amount of parts. Thus, the technology
investment is small compared to the amount of useful data able
to be gathered.
The principal limitation of condition monitoring regarding
freight railways is the inability of wayside systems to monitor
vehicles in real-time, as such systems can only identify a
fault at specific locations along the track [11]. A minor fault
can occur and dramatically grow between sensing points.
This reduces the overall system reliability. Possible solutions
include increasing the number of sensing points or imple-
menting onboard monitoring equipment. Although the first
approach can reduce the problem, it is expensive and the
situation remains the same in essence. The second approach
eliminates the time between monitoring actions but involves
more resources because it requires a sensing, processing and
transmitting unit per each monitored set of components.
Safety, cost and performance requirements for high speed
railway vehicles have driven the development of a wide range
of onboard condition monitoring applications, such as in the
German ICE3 and the Japanese Shinkansen, whose bogies
are instrumented for real-time measuring of parameters like
component acceleration or temperature [12]. The informa-
tion gathered through real-time condition monitoring systems
enables fault prognoses, which consists of estimating the
remaining useful life of the vehicle components for improving
maintenance schedules, and reducing overall operational costs,
downtimes and accidents [13]. Furthermore, new develop-
ments of enabling devices present an opportunity for executing
advanced asset management systems in the near future [14].
The cost of wireless communication hardware for condition
monitoring in 2007 was reduced to ¼ of its 2000 price [15].
Nowadays, the components required to integrate a condition
monitoring sensor-node (processor, wireless radio, battery, and
sensor) cost less than 20 euro [16]–[18]. This price reduction
enables the development of specialized low-cost condition
monitoring applications for the freight railway sector.
This article aims to provide a literature review on relevant
condition monitoring systems and techniques, which may
be implemented in railway vehicles without onboard electric
power, i.e. freight wagons. There are related literature reviews
covering condition monitoring applications and techniques in
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
5
Fig. 1. Train communications network topologies.
the railway sector [3], [10], [11], [13], [19], [20], but none of
them specialized in onboard equipment for unpowered vehicle
component fault detection. This article classifies different
types of onboard monitoring systems in Section II. Section III
illustrates various research and commercial condition moni-
toring applications, categorized by vehicle subsystem, show-
ing their architecture and monitoring capabilities. Section IV
describes techniques for analyzing and transforming data into
maintenance decisions. Section V briefly shows possible meth-
ods for providing an electrical power source for an onboard
condition monitoring system in freight railway vehicles before
concluding remarks are provided in Section VI.
II. O NBOARD S YSTEM T YPES
For integrating condition monitoring systems onto freight
wagons, it is necessary to address the following elements:
power source, mechanical requirements, and communications.
In most cases, locomotive electric power is not available
to the wagon, hence it is necessary to use batteries, power
harvesting or generation techniques. The hardware must be
rugged enough to withstand the demanding conditions of the
railway environment, with different levels of requirements
depending on its location in the vehicle. Finally, communi-
cations integration requires technologies that are adaptable to
the linear network topology of a train. This can be achieved
by means of: a direct wired connection (Fig. 1a); a wireless
radio link to a hub in the locomotive (Fig. 1b); a node-to-node
communication architecture were each device is responsible
of transmitting and receiving data from adjacent devices until
reaching the base station in the locomotive (Fig. 1c); a fourth
option is a direct link between each node and a remote,
internet connected base hub, possibly through SigFox, GSM-
R, or satellite technologies (Fig. 1d) [10]. This section reviews
various ways of integrating condition monitoring systems into
railway freight wagons.
A. Portable Autonomous Devices
An early example of portable autonomous technology is
the End of Train Device (EOT). EOTs are usually installed
in the last wagon of a freight train to monitor brake pipe
6 IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 19, NO. 1, JANUARY 1, 2019
Fig. 2. Portable autonomous device.
pressure and communicate it to the driver (Fig. 2). EOT’s
were traditionally powered by batteries, and were equipped
with a red light, a pressure sensor, and a narrow band radio
transmitter, all housed in a portable autonomous unit [21]. This
allowed manual installation on different wagons when the train
was reconfigured, but they were very heavy and the external
radio antenna usually failed due to its lack of robustness.
Modern EOTs perform synchronized brake application, but
face battery power limitations, achieving 15 to 16 hours
continuous operation with 10Ah batteries [22]. Furthermore,
narrow band radio communications are not always available
because of the variable natural environment including artifi-
cial obstacles like tunnels, and issues with train length and
device location on the wagon Reports indicate generating
4 or 5 black-out events. State of the art EOTs have motion
detection sensors, GPS location capabilities, typically an 8W
narrow band radio for communication with the locomotive,
a polymeric housing with internal antennae, battery, and a
small air turbine for energy generation [23], [24]. These EOTs
are mainly a reactive maintenance tool, providing information
about a single vehicle, the brake pipe, and the track. Hence,
they do not monitor rolling stock component degradation, but
may detect advanced state track or brake faults.
B. Permanent Powered Devices
An alternative for providing an energy source to condition
monitoring systems that are permanently integrated to unpow-
ered freight wagons is transforming the solar or mechanical
energy that the wagons are exposed to into electric energy.
This approach was used by McClanachan et al. [25] when
they proposed using an instrumented standard revenue heavy
haul coal wagon for autonomous monitoring of vehicle-
track interaction during normal operating conditions. This
system was powered by a battery charged by a wheelset
driven car alternator (Fig. 3). This Instrumented Wagon had
cellular and WiFi capabilities for wireless communications,
and measured vehicle speed, location, brake pipe pressure,
longitudinal acceleration, bogie yaw, and vertical wheel force.
A microprocessor controlled the acquisition and power subsys-
tems. McClanachan et al. [26] further developed this system
to allow measuring of vertical, longitudinal and lateral coupler
forces. Similarly, Hartley et al. [27] used a wheelset-coupled
electric generator technique for enabling an instrumented
heavy haul freight wagon capable of long term monitoring
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 3. Wheelset-alternator transmission for powering
McClanachan et al. [25] condition monitoring system.
of the electronically controlled pneumatic brakes performance
during normal service. The wheelset rotation moved a 12V
car alternator using a two stage belt-pulley transmission. Then,
a circuit managed the charging cycle of the integrated 80Ah
battery. Data acquisition was controlled via a GSM network.
This instrumented wagon was able to operate up to a week
before having to replace the batteries or download the logged
data.
Darby et al. [28] transformed a standard revenue service
wagon into an instrumented ore car (IOC), which was used
in [29] and [30] to monitor performance of vehicle operational
conditions and enabled a predictive maintenance approach for
the track in the Australian Pilbara region. The system was
powered using solar cells in conjunction with batteries. Control
and tracking was achieved by a combination of 3G cellular and
satellite networks. Data corresponding up to 40 trips could be
stored, although the information was normally downloaded at
the end of each trip. The IOC measured parameters like bogie
suspension displacement, sideframe acceleration, brake pipe
pressure, drawbar force, vehicle location and others. Another
example of an instrumented wagon is the one proposed by
Donelson et al. [31], in which a modified Timken wheelset
bearing [32] acted as a generator for charging the battery that
powered the monitoring system.
The systems reviewed in this section had similar architec-
tures. The different sensors, energy generation and data acqui-
sition subsystems were located in different parts of the wagon
(Fig. 4), and interacted through wired connections. A single
standard wagon in a train was modified and used to gather
track and train behavior data. The systems were powered by
a combination of batteries and energy generation/harvesting.
To achieve these permanently powered instrumented wagons,
all the vehicles undertook a complex transformation process
and required more maintenance to operate compared to a
standard wagon.
C. Trickle Charged Devices
Heavy haul freight trains transporting coal or iron ore
can have hundreds of wagons and lengths greater than two
BERNAL et al.: ONBOARD CONDITION MONITORING SENSORS, SYSTEMS AND TECHNIQUES: A REVIEW
Fig. 4. Permanent powered devices.
Fig. 5. Trickle charged devices.
kilometers. In the majority of cases, a wagon interacts with
the adjacent wagons by only two mechanisms: force transmis-
sion through the draft gear, and pressurized air transmission
through the brake pipeline. Thus, freight wagons can usually
be considered as a dark territory, i.e. no electric power and no
communications are available. However, Electronic Controlled
Pneumatic (ECP) braking technologies are gradually being
adopted by the freight railway industry. Besides allowing
precise synchronization for braking application through the
whole train, thus reducing fuel consumption and component
degradation [33], this technology enables a new type of inter-
action between wagons: electric power transmission. The Train
Health Advisory System (THAS) was a low-cost onboard
condition monitoring system powered by the ECP electric
network [34]. This system monitored wheel-rail contact forces
using wagon motion measurements. The use of ECP energy
source allows installing the THAS on each wagon of a
train (Fig. 5), thus continuous real-time condition monitoring
for every vehicle is possible, enabling onboard wheel flat
detection for example [35]. Additionally, removing the energy
generation/harvesting subsystem from an onboard condition
monitoring application makes it cheaper to install and operate.
On the other hand, the integration with the braking system
involves additional measures and certifications to achieve the
required system integrity level. Details about the THAS are
reviewed in Section III A 1.
D. Long Life Autonomous Devices
Autonomous wireless devices are not yet widely used in
the freight railway industry. However, the cost reduction of
electronics and increasing safety requirements for transporting
hazardous materials, has driven the deployment of distrib-
uted IoT sensor-node applications like Nexiot Intermodal by
European wagon company VTG [36]. This system consisted
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
7
Fig. 6. Long life autonomous device.
of IP67 self-contained sensor-nodes that can be fixed to
containers or freight wagons. The devices weighed 1 kg and
were attached to the wagon body using magnets, rivets or
adhesives [37]. They wirelessly transmitted location data and
shock events via a cellular network every five minutes. The
sensor-nodes were powered by a combination of solar cells
and batteries. This application is closer to a tracking service
than to a vehicle condition monitoring system, but it might be
the first fleet-wide wireless sensor network (WSN) deployed
in the railway freight sector.
Applications like Amsted Rail’s IONX [38],
Perpetuum [39], and SKF Insight Rail [40] were powered
by integrated energy harvesters or batteries, and all were
capable of years of continuous operation. These systems
performed near real-time condition monitoring on vehicle
components. Even so, they were mostly used in passenger
vehicles, and not in fleet-wide implementations. Nevertheless,
their autonomous sensor-node, wireless architecture, may be
valuable to freight operations, given their easy installation and
long sensor-node life. Unlike Permanent Powered Devices,
Long Life Autonomous Devices are not distributed throughout
the vehicle, but enclose all the sensors, data processing,
communication and power subsystems in a single, wireless
housing. The installation of these devices takes minutes, and
can be performed by a single person (Fig. 6). More details
about these systems are reviewed in Section III A 3.
E. General Robustness Considerations
Embedded computing components, sensors, cables and
other hardware for railway applications must be sufficiently
rugged and robust. Trains may experience sub-zero to over
50°C temperatures, humidity variations, high vibrations and
generally harsh conditions over their lifetime. To guarantee
equipment functionality, authorities have established standards
including EN 50155:2007, a standard detailing various require-
ments for electronic equipment to be used in rolling stock, and
IEC 61373:2010, which specifies the requirements for testing
electric, electronic and pneumatic components to be installed
in railway vehicles to guarantee that they will withstand the
severe vibrations of the railway operational environment [41].
For a device to be certified according to IEC 61373:2010,
for example, it must tolerate three tests where it is exposed
to different levels of vibrations: functional random vibration
test, simulated long-life test and shock test. Depending on
the location of the equipment in the vehicle, the standard
classifies the devices in three categories: 1) body mounted;
2) bogie mounted; and 3) axle mounted. For the shock test,
8 IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 19, NO. 1, JANUARY 1, 2019

TABLE I
M AIN D IFFERENCES B ETWEEN THE R EVIEWED O NBOARD S YSTEM T YPES

Fig. 7. Freight wagon subsystem scheme.

the equipment must endure up to 5g, 30g and 100g according

to the corresponding category.
Table I summarizes the main differences of the onboard Fig. 8. Freight wagon wheelset. Redrawn from [43].
monitoring system types.

III. C LASSIFICATION OF O NBOARD C ONDITION

M ONITORING S YSTEMS
Freight wagons are generally unpowered railway vehicles
whose main function is to contain cargo and move it on
the rail network. Wagons differ in design depending on the
type of goods they transport, but the main subsystems remain
the same: carbody, underframe, suspension, bogies, wheelsets,
brakes, and couplings [42]. Fig. 7 shows the mentioned
subsystems for a coal freight wagon.
The following sections show different research and com-
mercially available systems for onboard measuring of railway
vehicle parameters, which can be later used to detect or predict
faults. These systems are categorized by vehicle subsystems.
A. Wheelset and Bearing Condition Monitoring
A wheelset is formed by an axle and two wheels whose
treads have a specific tapered profile. This conical and flanged
shape generates lateral forces to maintain the vehicle running
in the center of the track, and promotes self-steering on curves.
The conicity value indicates the tapered segment angle on
the wheel tread. With a high conicity, the curve performance
is improved, but the critical hunting speed at which lateral
instability occurs is diminished. Roller bearings are fitted
at each end of the wheelset to allow rotation and transmit
vertical and lateral forces to the bearing adapters on the bogie
sideframes, and in some cases, to a primary suspension [42].
Freight wagons usually have no primary suspension system,
but a suspension element such as a resilient interface pad is
common. The wheelset and bearing subsystems are shown
in Fig. 8.
1) Wheel-Rail Contact Forces Condition Monitoring: The
derailment coefficient is the ratio between vertical and lateral
wheel-rail contact forces [20]. Measuring this parameter is
relevant because it permits derailment probability estimation
for specific track locations or running conditions [44]. The
SNC-Lavalin company offers an onboard measuring appli-
cation known as Instrumented Wheelset Technology IWT.
It is a standard wheelset instrumented with various strain
gauges placed on the inner face of each wheel, connected
to a processor-transmitter attached to the axle. This system
is powered using inductive transmission, i.e. electric energy
must be available on the wagon and is wirelessly transmitted

Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
BERNAL et al.: ONBOARD CONDITION MONITORING SENSORS, SYSTEMS AND TECHNIQUES: A REVIEW
Fig. 9. Typical strain gauge location for instrumented wheelsets in (a) wheel
and (b) axle section. Redrawn from [50].
to the wheelset via induction. The IWT system measures
lateral, vertical and longitudinal forces exerted on the wheelset
as well as contact patch position and rotational speed [45].
It is not possible to apply tread brakes to the instrumented
wheelset, as the heat generated will damage the strain gauge
instrumentation.
A specific application of Lavalin’s IWT4 was on an iron
ore railway transportation system in Brazil [46]. The system
was installed on a 37.5 ton axle load wheelset, placing strain
gauges and A/D converters in carbon fiber cases on the inner
faces of the wheels. This system was completely sealed and
had no moving parts. It wirelessly transmitted the acquired
signals to a reception unit mounted on the bogie in a temper-
ature controlled steel housing. The gathered data was used to
evaluate the performance of the wagons considering the L/V
derailment coefficient. This system acquired data at 20 samples
per second (S/s) at the time of the publication (2011), but
Lavalin planned to increase this acquisition rate.
Spanish laboratory CETEST has also developed an instru-
mented wheelset to measure wheel-rail contact forces and con-
tact patch position. Its configuration is similar to IWT4, using
strain gauges mounted on the wheel, wireless transmission
of the data but an increased sampling rate at 1000 S/s [47].
The CETEST Instrumented Wheelset was capable of assessing
wheel-rail contact forces at speeds up to 350 km/h [48], with a
measuring error as low as 4% [49]. The typical location of the
strain gauges on an instrumented wheelset is shown in Fig. 9.
These monitoring systems are suitable for very specific
applications, where the objective is assessing specific vehicle
dynamic performance under particular operating conditions.
Their architecture, installation and operational requirements
are too complex and expensive to be used on every vehicle
for a continuous condition monitoring WSN.
Thomas et al. [34] proposed a low cost, low maintenance
Train Health Advisory System (THAS) for freight trains,
which used energy from the ECP brakes for powering a system
capable of monitoring parameters like wheel unloading, L/V
coefficient, track degradation, ride quality, hunting, wheel flats
and axle derailment on freight wagons. This system used
the Inverse Model developed and validated by Xia et al. [51].
The kinematics of the wheelsets were obtained via numer-
ical integration to find wheel-rail contact forces using the
sum of Hertzian spring-damping forces between rails and
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
9
Fig. 10. THAS schematic. Redrawn from [34].
wheels. The THAS was fitted to an Australian RailCorp AK
track recording car, which independently recorded track data.
A vehicle multibody dynamic simulation implemented via
VAMPIRE software, was fed with the recorded track data
to generate the wheel-rail contact forces experienced by the
vehicle during the test. Both simulation, and inverse model
outcomes were compared, showing encouraging results for an
onboard monitoring device [52]. According to the authors,
the THAS can be further developed for enabling calculation of
wheel-rail contact forces based on acceleration measurements
from the carbody and vehicle running speed. It was proposed
that a THAS system onboard each wagon would analyze the
whole train to achieve a fleet wide monitoring approach [53],
as shown in Fig. 10.
An alternative method was proposed by
Matsumoto et al. [54]–[56] using non-contact gap sensors
detecting wheel distortion caused by wheel-rail contact
forces. A bracket was attached to the axlebox, holding two
inductive displacement sensors measuring lateral movement
of the wheel rim and web (Fig. 11). These sensors had
a precision of less than 0.01 mm. The movements of
the wheelset were compensated using the same type of
sensors identifying axial and inclination movements of the
wheelset relative to the axlebox. The vertical wheel-rail
contact forces were determined measuring the axle spring
deformation. Thus, the calculation of the L/V ratio was
enabled using this method. For obtaining longitudinal forces,
Matsumoto et al. [54] measured the deformation on the lever
of the axlebox support link. This system was validated with
traditional strain gauge based measurements.
2) Wheel Condition Monitoring: Wheelset faults are,
in general, more frequently related to accidents rather than
other vehicle components [13]. Wheel degradation is a com-
plex phenomenon depending on wear and fatigue, which are
in turn affected by various elements such as railway route,
axle load, train speed profile, wheel-rail adhesion conditions,
rail profile and wheel position in the vehicle. Therefore,
analytical, statistical or numerical approaches are not practical
for estimating the wear condition of each particular wheel in
a train. In this case, condition monitoring techniques are more
convenient [20]. Current wheel health assessment relies mostly
on wayside equipment such as Wheel Impact Load Detectors
(WILD) or wheel profile monitoring systems. The WILD
system consists of an instrumented track section where strain
gauges or accelerometers enable quantification of the force
exerted on the rail by the passing wheels. A wheel tread defect
can be detected when the measured force exceeds a predefined
threshold [57], [58]. Modern wheel profile monitoring systems
are wayside applications that measure the wheel tread section
10
Fig. 11. Non-contact lateral forces measuring system layout. Redrawn
from [56].
profile at a specific location of the wheel circumference while
the train transits the monitoring equipment. Using lasers,
cameras, and in some cases mirrors, the wheel tread profile is
captured and compared to a wheel profile database, enabling
wear measurement and detection of worn wheels [59].
Alemi et al. [20] reviewed different research approaches for
potential detection of wheel flats, eccentricities, corrugation,
roughness and other wheel defects using on-board ultrasonic,
magnetic, vibration and acoustic signals. A selection of these
approaches is described in the following paragraphs.
Wheel-rail contact mostly takes place on the rail head–
wheel tread interface, and less frequently on the rail gauge
corner-wheel flange interface, the latter occurring mostly in
curves. For the second case, the concentration of forces leads
to high stress in both rail and wheel, increasing the possibility
of damage by means of fatigue, wear or deformation [60].
Dwyer-Joyce et al. [60] proposed detecting wheel flange –
rail contact events by using an ultrasonic transducer mounted
on the wheel (Fig. 12b). The sensor emitted an ultrasonic pulse
through the wheel. If there was no contact between the wheel
flange and the rail, the ultrasonic pulse bounced on the wheel
tread surface and was fully captured again by the sensor.
However, if the wheel flange and the rail are in contact,
a portion of the ultrasonic pulse was transmitted to the rail,
and the reflected signal was reduced. The authors materialized
this system in the laboratory using a NDT ultrasonic pulse
receiver with a band center frequency of 2.2 MHz fixed
to the wheel. The acquisition was performed at 500 MS/s,
while the wheel specimen was subject to a range of vertical
(0 kN – 80 kN) and lateral (0 kN – 9 kN) forces using a test
rig and hydraulic cylinders (Fig. 12a). The authors were not
only able to detect the flanging event and its intensity, but also
detected a correlation between the reflected ultrasonic pulse
and the vertical and lateral forces.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 19, NO. 1, JANUARY 1, 2019
Fig. 12. (a) Wheel flange-rail contact test rig. (b) Ultrasonic transducer
location [60].
Fig. 13. Hollow shaft sensor node prototype [61].
Frankenstein et al. [61] performed simulations using EFIT
(Elastodynamic Finite Integration Technique), to evaluate the
possibility of creating a health monitoring system by installing
an acoustic sensor inside the hollow shaft of a wheelset
axle. Using the simulations, the authors identified that a
frequency range with an upper limit of 300 kHz contained
relevant information for detecting wheel defects. A complete
wireless sensor node including battery, piezoelectric sensor,
A/D converter, digital signal processor, Bluetooth transmitter
and other auxiliary electronics was built and installed inside
a hollow ICE-2 wheelset (Fig. 13). Three different width
artificial cracks were created on the wheel tread. The wheelset
was subjected to an 11 ton vertical force and speeds from zero
km/h to 240 km/h using a laboratory test rig. The sensor node
was able to detect the three artificial cracks.
Wheel flats may appear in a braking event if the wheel
locks (i.e. when a wheelset does not rotate while the train
is moving). When not detected, the presence of this defect
on the wheel surface may damage the infrastructure or the
rolling stock because of the severe impacts and vibration
generated during subsequent operation [62]. Bosso et al. [62]
proposed an onboard wheel flat detection algorithm by eval-
uating axlebox vertical accelerations in relation to the wheel
rotation when the vehicle is moving. The algorithm consisted
of generating a vector containing acceleration values from
a single wheel rotation. Comparing the maximum recorded
value to the mean acceleration vector RMS, a wheel flat
severity index (WFI) is then obtained. In the majority of
BERNAL et al.: ONBOARD CONDITION MONITORING SENSORS, SYSTEMS AND TECHNIQUES: A REVIEW
Fig. 14. Instrumented axlebox covers for wheel flat detection algorithm field
test [62].
European countries, the maximum accepted wheel flat length
is 60 mm. This algorithm detected 30 mm length wheel flats
with an acquisition rate of 250 S/s at up to 20 km/h. For
detection at 90 km/h, the method requires data acquisition at
1 kS/s. This time domain algorithm was verified via numerical
simulations and tests in a railway vehicle using a modified
axlebox cover (Fig. 14). This method successfully detected
early and advanced wheel flat defects. The authors affirmed
this method can be implemented in WSNs built on low power
microcontrollers because of its simplicity.
3) Bearing Condition Monitoring: Grudén et al. [63] per-
formed an experiment for testing the reliability of a WSN
measuring ambient and axlebox temperatures on a train wagon.
Having in mind the high accelerations present in the railway
environment, the circuit boards were embedded in a shock
absorbent material. The battery and antenna were not mounted
on the circuit board, but in a separate body using flexible
cables. All the electronics were housed in an aluminum case
bolted to the bogie sideframe, but the temperature sensor was
attached to the axlebox. Three of the initial four sensors were
still working correctly after five weeks of operation.
Besides heat and vibration produced by the rotating ele-
ments of a railway vehicle, acoustic emissions (AE) are also
indicators of the asset health. AE “is defined as the generation
of elastic waves made by a sudden redistribution of molecules
inside or on the surface of a material” [64]. The energy
released when temperature or load affects a material generates
stress waves. Unlike accelerometers, piezoelectric acoustic
emissions transducers operate at very high frequencies
(30 kHz – 10000 kHz), and have a higher sensitivity, thus
reducing mechanical noise interference in the measuring
process [65].
Papaelias et al. [3] proposed a method for detecting bearing
defects using piezoelectric sensors placed on the axlebox.
Amini et al. [64] used piezoelectric AE sensors and enve-
lope analysis to detect the presence of bearing defects in
railway bearings and, in some cases, the system was able
to determine the specific fault. The authors attached the AE
piezoelectric sensor to the axlebox using magnets. The train
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
11
Fig. 15. Perpetuum sensor node. Redrawn from [66].
was moving at 48 km/h while the data was acquired at a
sampling rate of 500 kS/s. After performing power spectrum
and envelope spectrum analysis at a central frequency of 6 kHz
with 2 kHz bandwidth, noticeable peaks appeared on the bear-
ing fundamental defect frequencies, indicating the presence of
bearing defects.
Bosso et al. [12] proposed to measure temperature on
the axlebox to identify the presence of bearing faults. First,
a moving average was calculated for a 2s window. This value
was then compared to the ones obtained from the other three
axleboxes of the same bogie, looking for an abnormal value.
Additionally, the recorded temperature was compared to a
defined threshold, and a theoretical bearing temperature whose
value varied in relation to the vehicle speed and ambient
temperature. According to the authors, temperature measuring
only indicates the presence or absence of a fault, triggering
an eventual corrective maintenance action (diagnosis). On the
other hand, axlebox vibration monitoring enables early stage
fault detection and predictive maintenance (prognosis), but
requires complex monitoring algorithms.
Perpetuum is a European company established in 2004,
dedicated to information gathering for reliability, cost reduc-
tion and safety. They developed battery-free wireless sensor-
nodes (Fig. 15) to be installed onboard railway systems to
monitor various parameters. The sensor-nodes were powered
via electromagnetic vibration energy harvesters [39].
Australian Metro Trains Melbourne installed Perpetuum
sensor-nodes to monitor wheel bearings and wheels in some
passenger trains [66]. The sensor nodes were installed on
the axlebox and wirelessly transmitted filtered data to a train
gateway, and later to a cloud service via GPRS. 3-axial
accelerometers with a sample rate of 1024 S/s and measuring
range of +/− 20g were used. Perpetuum affirmed these sensor
nodes were capable of withstanding up to +/− 200g and
they were designed to work for twenty years without main-
tenance. Although this technology was originally conceived
for monitoring vehicle components, Metro Trains Melbourne
12 IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 19, NO. 1, JANUARY 1, 2019

used it to monitor evolution of track irregularities. During

this review, examples of Perpetuum applications for passenger
vehicles were found, but not fleet-wide freight train applica-
tions. From the practical point of view, installing sensors on
axleboxes is not desirable due to maintainability and system
robustness issues. Components attached to the axlebox may
experience accelerations of 100g, whereas the ones fixed to
the bogie or the car body may experience accelerations values
of 10g and 1g. Moreover, it is not necessary in most cases to
obtain the full track geometry since it is possible to identify
track faults through high acceleration values measured at the
bogie [67].
The US company Amsted Rail developed IONX [38],
an on-board condition monitoring system capable of assessing
various subsystems of a railway vehicle in near-real time.
This system was conceived to be used on freight wagons and
locomotives. IONX is a WSN consisting of a Communica- Fig. 16. IONX sensor node installed on bearing adapter. Redrawn from [72].
tion Management Unit (gateway node) and small distributed
wireless sensor-nodes powered by lithium batteries. These
such technology enables railway operators to substitute fixed
sensor-nodes acquire signals and transmit processed data via
interval bearing replacement periods for a more cost efficient
Bluetooth to the gateway node. The information is then sent to
condition based bearing replacement interval [73]. SKF Insight
a server using a cellular network. IONX was able to monitor
nodes were retrofitted on each wheelset bearing using a single
parameters such as impacts, wagon weight, commodity tem-
axlebox cover bolt. The system indicated the location and
perature, open/closed hatches, handbrake activation, location,
severity of bearing faults and wheel flats.
speed and bearing temperature. Amsted Rail advertised a
SKF Insight Rail measured location, temperature and accel-
10-year battery life for all their sensor-nodes and 5-year
eration at sampling rates from 3 S/s to 10 kS/s, at up to 60g.
battery life for gateway nodes varying from 2 to 16 cellular
For communication purposes, it used 3G or 2G cellular data.
transmission events per day.
The sensor nodes were powered via lithium-thionyl chloride
Australian rail freight operator SCT installed the IONX
battery packs, achieving more than a three-year operating
system for detecting bearing burn off (BBO) [68]. Although
period under normal conditions. This system was tested on
the track operated by SCT had wayside hot-box detectors
a SJ Swedish operated railway vehicle in 2015, effectively
capable of identifying stressed bearings, BBOs still occurred
detecting three damaged bearings. SKF Insight Rail was finally
because of the lack of continuous real-time condition mon-
launched in the first half of 2017 [74].
itoring for the bearings. Eighty sensor nodes were installed
and operated on fifteen locomotives and ten wagons over
B. Suspension Condition Monitoring
eighteen months (Fig. 16). The temperature of each bearing
adapter was measured four times per minute, and then it was Suspension components are responsible for a controlled
averaged and recorded. Local processing was performed in the interaction between the vehicle subsystems and the track
sensor-nodes, generating alerts and corresponding actions for surface. In the case of railway vehicles, suspension is classified
the crew: bearing inspection, speed reduction, bearing replace- as primary when it is connected to the wheelset, or secondary
ment. Although two thirds of the route are not covered by in any other case. Most freight wagons have only secondary
cellular data, the system delivered relevant alarms to the train suspension between the bogie sideframes and bolster. The sus-
driver and recorded operating temperatures for later uploading pension system of the widely used three piece bogie (Fig. 17),
of the data when the cellular network was available [69]. consists of a spring nest and damping friction wedges [42].
As expected, temperature measured on the bearing adaptor Improper loading procedures or incorrect distribution of
surface was not the bearing temperature. To overcome this the cargo in the wagon are the main reasons for suspen-
problem, Kypuros et al. [70] used an experimental setup sim- sion component failures [9]. According to Ulianov et al.
ulating various operating conditions, while measuring bearing [9], there are no wayside or onboard automated detection
and bearing adaptor temperature and vibration, on defect-free systems focused on suspension faults up to the moment of
and faulty bearings [71]. The authors proposed a correlation that publication. It is possible to indirectly detect these faults
function to estimate bearing cup temperature in relation to through WILD systems, but the workshop inspection is the
bearing adaptor surface temperature. This correlation function main method used [9]. On the other hand, there are suspension
performed well within a −20°C to 140°C range with a fault detection techniques in the research stage, which are
+/− 10°C precision [70]. discussed in Section IV A.
German company SKF started developing SKF Insight
in 2013, a wireless sensor-node certified for railway appli- C. Brake Condition Monitoring
cations, able to measure bearing vibration and temperature in In traditional freight trains, the braking force is exerted on
passenger train bogies. SKF affirmed the implementation of the wheel treads using brake blocks or brake shoes moved

Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
BERNAL et al.: ONBOARD CONDITION MONITORING SENSORS, SYSTEMS AND TECHNIQUES: A REVIEW
Fig. 17. Typical three piece bogie components [75].
by pneumatic cylinders. The braking force is controlled by
a single “brake pipe” that runs the whole length of the
train. When the pressure in the brake pipe drops, a control
valve allows pressurized air from each wagon reservoir into
the brake cylinder. This design also enables an automatic
brake application when an accidental brake pipe pressure drop
occurs, for example, in case of a pipe break or train pull apart.
On the other hand, the brake pipeline generates a control delay
in brake application for long trains. The basic brake system is
shown in Fig. 18. The alternative electronic-pneumatic brakes
allow simultaneous brake application along the train, using an
electronic signal to control braking activation [42].
Hartley et al. [27] implemented an instrumented wagon to
monitor electronic brake performance on freight wagons for
the Transnet railway operator in South Africa, with the specific
objectives of reducing incidents and increasing capacity. The
electronics required to perform data acquisition and processing
on each wagon were powered by two 80Ah batteries and a
12V automotive alternator mechanically coupled to a wagon
axle. This system required maintenance every three months.
It performed speed, coupler force, brake pipe pressure, brake
cylinder pressure, and location measurements. This system
acquired GPS signals at 5 S/s, and other channels at 1 kS/s.
After onboard processing, the data was reduced and stored at
1 S/s, with higher sampling rates at specific GPS triggered
locations. Finally, the system generated a 200 MB data file
per round trip, containing all the information of a round-trip.
Besides measuring freight wagon acceleration, Aimar and
Somà [77] proposed brake fault identification by evaluating
brake cylinder pressure and brake block temperature. During
their study, they analyzed a Central European freight railway
operator’s five-year breakdown records, finding a higher failure
rate in the braking subsystem compared to other axle-box and
wheelset subsystems. Common faults were poor valve perfor-
mance, brake cylinder faults, improper air pressure and brake
block irregular wear. The system implemented by Aimar and
Somà was battery-powered, based on an ATmega2560 micro-
processor due to its low power consumption relative to data
acquisition and signal processing capabilities. The temperature
sensor was embedded in a modified brake pad, acquiring at
1 S/s with an available measuring range of −50°C to +500°C.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
13
Fig. 18. Basic brake system. Redrawn from [76].
The selected pressure sensor was able to measure from zero
bar to seven bar, acquiring at 200 S/s. The sensor was attached
to a standard auxiliary terminal normally used for brake
air pressure testing. This system was installed on a freight
wagon to assess the reliability of the proposed configuration,
and gather information for further development of an earlier
proposed condition monitoring application for freight wagons
powered by an electromagnetic vibration energy harvester
device [78].
Bosso et al. [12] proposed an algorithm for detecting faults
in brakes, measuring temperature on the brake calipers and
evaluating its variation in the time domain. The algorithm
compared the brake caliper temperature to the other brakes
in the same bogie for each braking event.
D. Bogie Condition Monitoring
Two wheelsets, two sideframes and a bolster are the main
components of the three-piece bogie (Fig. 17), which is
the most commonly used bogie for railway freight vehicles
in Australia, America, Africa, India and Russia [79]. This
subsystem supports the wagon frame and is able to rotate
and warp to allow steering along the railway track alignment.
For reducing body rocking motion, side-bearers are installed
between the bolster and the body, improving stability but
reducing curving performance [42].
Faiveley’s instability sensor was an onboard monitoring
device capable of detecting high frequency vibration and
shocks. It can be installed on the bogie frame or carbody.
During the European funded D-RAIL project, this device
was tested in various operating scenarios: Loose coupler,
artificial wheel-flat, coin on the track, derailment at 8 km/h and
normal conditions. The results from the experiments confirmed
enough system sensitivity to detect the expected faults. On the
other hand, it lacked wireless transmission and a GPS system
and had to be installed on both the bogie and the carbody [80].
E. Wagon Frame and Wagon Body Condition Monitoring
The main functions of a freight wagon frame is to transfer
longitudinal forces through the train and to support the load
being carried. The main parts of the frame are the transverse
beams, longitudinal beams (sills), and the body whose con-
figuration varies depending on the type of cargo. The wagon
frame and body are normally a single component for freight
wagons to maximize the volume carrying capacity [42].
14
Tam et al. [81] used distributed self-referencing (i.e. no
recalibration) optical fiber sensors to monitor temperature and
strain on a wagon body of a vehicle operated by Kowloon-
Canton Railway Corporation. The system resolution for the
strain measurement is of the order of one microstrain (με) and
a sampling rate of 10 S/s. It was possible to connect 10 optical
fiber sensors in series acquiring data simultaneously, each one
working with a different wavelength. This system monitored
carbody deformations; the results were compared to those
obtained using traditional electric strain gauge sensors. The
output data was very similar, showing that fiber optic sensors
can be used instead of traditional strain gauges, and have a
faster response time. At the same time, fiber optic systems are
immune to electromagnetic generated noise.
F. Derailment Detection
Hubacher and Scheiber [82] developed a pneumatic device
for detecting derailments on freight wagons, to prevent damage
to infrastructure and rolling stock. The system consisted of
pneumatic valves with a sprung mass oscillator calibrated
to react when accelerations on the carbody reached values
possibly generated by a derailed wheelset. When the vertical
acceleration exceeded +7.5g or −0.5g for a specified period,
the device activated the emergency brake valve, bringing
the train to a full stop. An indicator was also triggered for
identifying which valve activated the emergency brakes.
Given the rising popularity of WSNs, and the possibility of
implementing them in condition based monitoring for freight
railway vehicles, Macucci et al. [16], [17] developed a low
cost, ultra-low power sensor-node for detecting derailments on
freight wagons, envisaged to be powered via vibration energy
harvesting (inductive, capacitive, piezoelectric) coupled with
a supercapacitor. Texas Instruments CC1110 system-on-chip
was the main component, having an integrated transceiver
and ultra-low-power sleep mode. Analog Devices low power
ADXL362 and ST Microelectronics (for comparison) were the
selected accelerometers. The authors used two of the three
criteria posed by Kato and Terada [83]. Hence, if the amplitude
of the vertical acceleration measured on the axlebox was
greater than 0.15 g with frequencies higher than 20 Hz, and
the difference between the last two consecutive summations
of absolute vibration values in one second was greater than a
certain value, a derailment alarm was sent to the driver. The
system was built, and energy consumption was evaluated.
With one active period of 20 ms (reading, processing and
communicating) every 2 seconds, the average consumption
of the system was 0.5 mW. According to the authors, the
cost of the components (less than 20 Euro) and the energy
consumption value found were promising elements for the
development of a WSN for freight trains.
Donelson et al. [15] implemented an algorithm for detect-
ing derailments; it analyzed short segments of acceleration
signals measured at the bearing, looking for high amplitude
repetitive waveforms. This could indicate a wheel rolling
on ballast or over the sleepers. The system was contin-
uously acquiring and evaluating data while the train was
moving.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 19, NO. 1, JANUARY 1, 2019
The German company Siemens, in cooperation with
Deutsche Bahn, developed an electronic derailment detection
system which operated in several railway systems around
the world, including the Nuremberg Subway driverless sys-
tem [84]. Double integration of the vertical acceleration mea-
sured at the axlebox was performed. This way, the verti-
cal deviation of the track was obtained and evaluated in a
6 m window [85]. If the calculated deviation exceeded a
defined threshold, the presence of a derailed wheelset could be
established.
According to this literature review, acceleration signal eval-
uation seems to be the most common derailment detection
strategy. Several applications found [16], [17], [34], [82], [86]
used acceleration analysis (mechanical and digital) for detect-
ing derailment events.
G. Dynamic Behavior Condition Monitoring
Donelson et al. [15] implemented an Onboard Monitoring
and Control system (OBMCS) in the Advanced Concept Train
project of the US Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). The
instrumentation included single axial accelerometers mounted
on bearing adapters for identifying wheel/bearing defects
and derailment events, and bearing temperature sensors for
detecting overheated components. Two tri-axial accelerometers
on the carbody over the bolster beams detected low-frequency
hunting, impacts due to the track, vertical pitching and bounc-
ing, coupling shocks and slack run shocks. Proximity sensors
detected the position of the brake piston rod. This system
was powered via a combination of a battery and a generator
embedded inside a wheelset bearing. The system had a sleep
mode for efficient power management.
The company Bombardier Transportation developed an
instrumented bogie system called FLEXX Tronic, capable
of measuring various track parameters and their deteriora-
tion over time (vertical deformations, torsion, rail ripples
and crushed joints and switches) and also bogie operating
parameters, allowing high speed operation by compensating
carbody roll movement with active mechanical components
reacting to the acquired data. This system was first tested
in 2007 on a Regina 250 train, setting a speed record in
Sweden (282 km/h) [87].
Gao et al. [88] proposed a train ride quality testing sys-
tem using a wireless sensor network measuring vertical and
horizontal accelerations on the carbody. The system consisted
of distributed sensor nodes powered by 3.6V lithium batteries,
which recorded and sent acceleration data to a base station for
later processing. The sensor nodes used TI MSP430 microcon-
trollers, TI CC2420 ZigBee chips for communication and Sili-
con Designs low-cost 1221L accelerometers. The sensor nodes
were operated using UC Berkeley’s TinyOS. An active/sleep
algorithm was implemented to extend the life of the batteries.
The signals were low-pass filtered with cut-off frequencies
of 40 Hz and 100 Hz and power spectral density calculations
were used to process and compare the data against the relevant
standards. Only a locomotive and a wagon were instrumented.
Besides monitoring brake operation, the onboard monitoring
system for a multimodal freight wagon implemented by Aimar
BERNAL et al.: ONBOARD CONDITION MONITORING SENSORS, SYSTEMS AND TECHNIQUES: A REVIEW
Fig. 19. Instrumented axlebox cover [12].
and Somà [77] measured acceleration and position of the
carbody. This data logger system stored the information for
later analysis. It was powered by a battery, implementing a
wake-up/sleep algorithm for energy management. The system
achieved three-month continuous operation without additional
energy inputs.
Bosso et al. [12] designed and tested an instrumented
axlebox cover (Fig. 19) that enables running behavior mon-
itoring and component fault detection in a bogie. Once the
system is installed, each bogie is evaluated by more than
24 sensors including accelerometers, encoders, thermocouples
and thermal resistors.
The device may be integrated with an electric generator for
vehicles without a power system. The authors developed an
electronic board to acquire data and manage the sensors. The
board had a 4-channel ADC with a maximum sampling rate
of 51.2 kS/s with 24 bit resolution. Using a set of five analog
switches controlled by a digital input/output card, the system
could be reconfigured to pre-process and record any four
simultaneous signals, according to the monitoring algorithm
that was executed. This way, the cost of the system was
reduced by having only a fraction of data acquisition channels
in relation to the total number of sensors.
IV. O NBOARD C ONDITION M ONITORING T ECHNIQUES
This section reviews techniques and methods for analyzing
data acquired by condition monitoring systems to determine
the presence or absence of component faults, in either emerg-
ing or advanced states.
A. Fault Detection and Isolation Techniques
As part of Condition Based Monitoring (CBM) tech-
niques, Fault Detection and Isolation (FDI) is a widely used
approach [89], applicable to systems that degrade over time.
FDI consists of acquiring signals (acceleration, displacements,
acoustics, etc.) related to operating parameters or component
behavior, and then establishing the absence or presence of an
emerging fault, and identifying fault severity before it turns
into a failure [90]. When the relation between input and output
signals can be established, a model-based approach is used;
otherwise, when only output signals are available, a signal-
based method can be implemented. The general scheme of a
FDI system for railway applications is shown in Fig. 20.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
15
Fig. 20. General FDI system for railway applications [90].
1) Model-Based Methods: These methods rely on compar-
ing expected and measured system output values. The para-
meter obtained from this comparison is known as a residual,
and it is the indicator of the presence or absence of a fault.
The expected residual value for a defect-free system is zero.
Deviations from zero may indicate a possible fault is present
in the system [90]. Methods like parameter estimation, parity
equation and observer/Kalman filter are used for model-based
FDI.
Alfi et al. [91] used model-based and signal-based methods
for monitoring suspension components in railway bogies.
Although most modern passenger trains can already detect
unstable hunting motions, they are not able to perform condi-
tion monitoring; they only emit an alert based on exceeded
acceleration thresholds and are unable to predict emerging
unstable behavior. Alfi et al. [91] decided to use accelerom-
eters because of their small size, low cost and reliability
characteristics. They developed a model-based early instability
detector (EID) capable of indicating incipient bogie instability,
wheel profile wear, changes in anti-yaw damper response and
degradation of primary suspension parameters.
Their model-based method not only used output data, but
also compared the measurements with “ideal” output data
obtained by means of a mathematical model. The comparison
between measured and modeled output data generates resid-
uals, enabling the diagnostics of the system [91]. Extended
Kalman Filter (EKF) is a widely used FDI algorithm for
assessing operating parameters that are not directly mea-
sured. Alfi et al. [91] implemented various EKFs responding
to suspension parameters, and later used Bayesian statistics
to determine the most probable fault mode. Both methods
were evaluated using multibody simulations, showing good
performance.
Further developing Alfi’s proposal, Liu et al. [92] imple-
mented a model-based FDI method for detecting primary
suspension faults in passenger trains, using a Kalman Filtering
variation known as recursive least square algorithm. This
approach enabled memory and machine learning capabilities
for the model parameter estimation. The application required
nine accelerometers per bogie: one per axlebox, one per
primary suspension seat and one on the secondary suspension
seat of the carbody. The proposal was validated via field
16
Fig. 21. Accelerometer arrangement [95].
tests and numerical simulations for the Italian ETR500 high-
speed train, achieving good fault detection results with low
computational requirements.
2) Signal-Based Methods: When only output signals are
available in the system, a signal-based method is the way
to achieve FDI. The evaluation method is normally limited
to analyze amplitudes and frequencies [93], or to correlate
different output signals [94].
A variety of signal processing techniques are used to detect
and isolate a specific event from the output information of
a system. These include frequency domain, time domain,
time-frequency domain, filtering, and wavelet analysis, among
others. Once the signal is processed, it is compared against
a pre-built fault conditions database obtained from simula-
tions or experiments. The robustness of a signal-based method
is directly related to the cases covered by its database, since
all possible fault modes and noise disturbances should be
included [11].
Li et al. [94], [95] proposed an onboard signal-based
condition monitoring technique for fault detection in heavy
haul wagon bolster springs. Aiming to achieve a robust and
low-cost application, this technique consisted of mounting two
tri-axial accelerometers on each freight wagon, one located at
the front-left and other at the rear-right wagon body extreme,
as shown in Fig. 21. The method correlated the values acquired
by the two accelerometers, generating a fault indicator coef-
ficient that varied depending on the bolster spring nest health
condition. Validation of this approach was performed using
multibody dynamic simulations of a 40 ton axle-load wagon
with 10 different bolster spring faults. Even though the faults
had a relatively small effect on the wheel-rail dynamics (up
to +/− 10% variation), the method enabled detection and
isolation of small and moderate bolster spring faults.
Further details on model-based and signal-based FDI
techniques for railway condition monitoring are thoroughly
reviewed by Li et al. [11].
B. Noise Techniques
One of the most popular noise applications for identi-
fying railway faults is the wayside acoustic bearing defect
detector [96]. Similar to vibration analysis methods, analyz-
ing acoustic signals allows detection of different faults in
early stages, while thermal and visual control methods detect
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 19, NO. 1, JANUARY 1, 2019
degradation at a very advanced state only [97]. Unlike vibra-
tion or temperature sensors, onboard noise sensors (micro-
phones) can be installed in a remote position relative to
the monitored component. To acquire noise emitted by bear-
ings or wheel-rail contact, the sensor may be placed on the
carbody [98]. While Dwight and Jiang [98] considered the
on-board sound monitoring approach for identifying track
faults, the same approach may be used for monitoring vehicle
components. However, no onboard noise measurement devices
for vehicle component monitoring were identified in this
literature review. Installing the noise sensor on the carbody
minimizes its exposure to vibrations, and enhances the overall
robustness of the application. At the same time, this remote
location characteristic results in the challenge of pinpointing
which exact component may be malfunctioning. Furthermore,
a major drawback is the difficulty in performing validation
experiments. To obtain reliable noise information, a real train
with emerging or advanced faults must be instrumented and
operated.
C. Heat Techniques
In the present literature review, two types of onboard
temperature measuring applications for fault detection were
identified: brake monitoring and bearing monitoring. Mea-
suring temperature on a modified brake pad [77], enables
detection of a malfunctioning brake when a specific tempera-
ture threshold value is exceeded. Although specific commer-
cial developments like Amsted Rail’s IONX [38] and other
research approaches measure bearing temperature onboard the
vehicle, the most popular applications for bearing temperature
detection are trackside hot box detectors. A typical hot-box
detector triggers an alarm if the registered temperature is
more than 94.4°C above ambient temperature. Another eval-
uation method is comparing individual bearing temperatures
against the average bearing temperature of the whole train,
thus detecting bearing deterioration [70]. While temperature
comparison is not a complex computational task when com-
pared to acceleration processing, an advanced state fault is
required to increase the temperature level high enough to be
detected. Moreover, standard maintenance actions such as seal
replacement may generate an increased bearing temperature in
a healthy bearing [99].
Donelson et al. [15] acquired bearing temperature at a rate
of 2 S/s and applied exponential smoothing to the signal.
If the monitored bearing reached 104°C, the sampling rate was
augmented. Then, if the temperature increased at a rate higher
than 1.7°C per minute, an alarm was activated. If the bearing
temperature got to 115.6°C, an alarm was also activated. The
authors used a similar approach to assess vehicle vertical
motion and ride quality.
D. Vibration Techniques
Vibration envelope spectrum analysis is a popular method
for detecting bearing faults, and it is well described in [100]
and [101]. An onboard monitoring algorithm example pro-
posed by Gonzalez [102], implementing bearing acceleration
data analysis for detecting bearing faults, is shown in Fig. 22.
BERNAL et al.: ONBOARD CONDITION MONITORING SENSORS, SYSTEMS AND TECHNIQUES: A REVIEW
Fig. 22. Bearing defect detection and isolation algorithm. Redrawn
from [102].
Gonzalez uses bearing temperature and vehicle speed to trigger
an acceleration signal root mean square (RMS) and power
spectrum density (PSD) calculation for onboard fault detection
and isolation. It is important to notice that this algorithm
was designed only to detect faults. It was not conceived to
operate an onboard continuous monitoring device, were energy
management is a key aspect for the system feasibility.
Donelson et al. [15] used the lateral acceleration measured
on the carbody to detect vehicle hunting. The signal was low
pass filtered with a 3 dB cut off at 15 Hz and 40 dB/decade roll
off, and then it was resampled at 256 S/s and windowed to the
equivalent last 0.6 km. If either acceleration exceeded 0.26g
RMS or 1.5g peak to peak, a hunting alarm was activated. The
authors used similar approaches to assess vertical motion and
ride quality of the vehicle.
Nejikovsky and Keller [103] used the high-speed train
vibration safety limits established by the FRA, for assessing
the carbody lateral acceleration as follows. The acceleration
measured at floor level at the carbody ends was low-pass
filtered with a 10 Hz cut-off frequency. Then a one second
data window was evaluated, and an alarm was triggered if
the safety limit of 0.5 g peak-to-peak or above was detected.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
17
Fig. 23. Rail wagon sensor-node monitoring algorithm [113].
The authors used a similar approach for ensuring that the
carbody vertical acceleration was within the FRA established
limits.
Vehicle speed can be determined with high accuracy using
inertial sensors mounted on the bogie frame. This approach
was proposed by Mei and Li [104], and developed by
Ward et al. [19], by measuring the time delay between the
responses of two wheelsets to a specific track irregularity,
and then relating this acquired time value to the invariable
distance between those wheelsets. This evaluation method
has the advantage of requiring less robust sensors in relation
to wheelset or axlebox mounted sensors for vehicle speed
measurement. At the same time, this method is not affected
by wheel slip/slide events or wheel diameter variations as in
traditional axle mounted tachometers.
V. P OWERING O NBOARD C ONDITION
M ONITORING S YSTEMS
An onboard monitoring system for freight wagons should
have a lifetime long enough to be a viable investment.
18
TABLE II
M AIN C HARACTERISTICS OF REVIEWED M ETHODS FOR P OWERING O NBOARD M ONITORING S YSTEMS [1], [122]
In general, the energy barrier is the biggest challenge for adop-
tion of data measurement technologies in all industries [105].
Most freight wagons are not equipped with power sources,
thus sensor nodes and hubs must either have an energy
storing and generating/ harvesting mechanism, combined with
an efficient energy management strategy. The system should
aim for consumption lower than 40mW-100mW, which is the
estimated amount of energy that typical onboard systems can
harvest [106].
There are various components, processes and characteristics
in a WSN that affect the overall energy consumption: hardware
architecture, monitoring algorithm, processor, communication
(with the hub), communication interfaces (internal), memory,
and wireless network topology [107] between other elements.
If energy consumption is not sufficiently reduced, the measure-
ment application may not be viable. New IoT technologies
generally offer low power options but challenges remain in
some application areas. This problem is noted in several
studies regarding energy management techniques for sensor
nodes [106], [108]–[112].
A recurrent way to maximize the power efficiency in a
sensor node is to implement a low-power operation mode
(sleep mode) in the algorithm. This way, the current drawn is
reduced to the order of μW for a certain period. Fig. 23 shows
the sensor node algorithm used by Somà and Aimar [113]
for a continuous operation rail wagon sensor node, acquiring
acceleration data.
An experimental and numerical approach was conducted to
prove the feasibility of resonant magnetic energy harvesters
to power a wireless sensor network [114]. The working cycle
of that specific test algorithm was the following: 1) measure
(4.5mA), 2) transmit (27mA), and 3) sleep (80μA). The study
concluded that the single (by 2016) commercially available
electromagnetic vibration energy harvester is not suitable for a
freight wagon continuous monitoring system under the specific
conditions of the referenced study.
On the other hand, the European founded SUSTRAIL
project, aiming for an improved and more efficient multimodal
freight wagon, highlighted the importance of onboard condi-
tion monitoring systems enhancing availability and operational
cost [115]. The following energy generation and harvesting
mechanisms were studied:
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 19, NO. 1, JANUARY 1, 2019
1) Bearing Generators: There are different modified
wheelset bearings available, generating between 5W and
100W. The principal drawback of this approach is the direct
dependency to vehicle speed [115]. This approach was also
proposed by Donelson et al. [15]. The main challenge for a
bearing generator is to make it reliable and accessible enough
for use in large scale railway WSNs.
2) Compressed Air Generator: It is possible to use the brake
system pressurized air to generate electricity by installing
a small turbine, as in some modern EOTs [23], [24]. This
method requires a critical intervention to the standardized
brake system. There are also 20 W air powered lamps available
in the market for the mining industry [115]. This energy
generation method would be very expensive to develop, install
and operate in big numbers.
3) Thermoelectric Converter: Current Seebeck effect
devices enable low efficiency (12%) energy harvesting through
temperature differences. This technology is difficult to imple-
ment in freight wagons, given that the greatest temperature
difference found in these vehicles is between the brake pad or
brake disk and the bogie frame, where device installation can
be challenging. According to SUSTRAIL studies, it is possible
to generate 10W at 10V with a 100° difference [115].
4) Spring-Mass Oscillator: These devices may be mounted
on the bogie or axle, generating the greatest amount of energy
when resonating at the lowest frequency possible with the
highest amplitude. This frequency may vary depending on
the wagon load, suspension, wheelset and track irregularities
[115]. During the SUSTRAIL project, piezoelectric spring-
mass oscillators were tested. Vibrating at 80 Hz and 1 mm
amplitude, the system generated 2μW, which is enough to
power a single sensor but not a complete system. Given
the approach of the SUSTRAIL project, it was established
that current piezoelectric energy harvesting devices were not
suitable for the proposed condition monitoring system.
By contrast, Lewis et al. [116] performed various lab tests
where bearing fault detection was achieved, measuring accel-
eration with a simple sensor node powered by a commercial
piezoelectric energy harvester.
Grudén et al. [117] successfully powered a wireless railway
bearing monitoring sensor node using this technology, but only
in ideal conditions recreated inside a laboratory.
BERNAL et al.: ONBOARD CONDITION MONITORING SENSORS, SYSTEMS AND TECHNIQUES: A REVIEW 19

TABLE III
D ETAILED C HARACTERISTICS OF R EVIEWED O NBOARD C ONDITION M ONITORING S YSTEMS

Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
20 IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 19, NO. 1, JANUARY 1, 2019

TABLE III
(Continued.) D ETAILED C HARACTERISTICS OF R EVIEWED O NBOARD C ONDITION M ONITORING S YSTEMS

Gao et al. [118] were able to power a wireless trackside
sensor node, using batteries coupled with an electromagnetic
spring-mass oscillator, excited by passing rail vehicles. This
sensor-node used a ZigBee device to transmit acceleration,
temperature and humidity. The device was proposed in [119],
and developed in [120] to harvest energy using a mechanism
powered by track deformations.
Nagode et al. [121] proposed a motion-based energy har-
vester, this time using the relative movement between vehicle
components like the bogie and the carbody.
Perpetuum [39] took spring-mass energy harvesting technol-
ogy to the commercial level, achieving near-real time bearing
and track condition monitoring for passenger vehicles. This
energy harvesting mechanism transforms track irregularities
into electricity. Although it is not quantified or published, it is
logical to expect less energy generation on a very smooth track
using this harvesting technology.
5) Photovoltaic: Solar panels are well developed and
widely used in various industries, making them an attractive
option for powering a condition monitoring system. With an
efficiency of around 17% and a 1.2Wh sensor node power
consumption per day (according to the SUSTRAIL monitoring
system), the required solar panel area would be 0.01 m2
(about 0.9 times the area of a compact disk). The difficulties
with solar energy are environmental, since trains operating at
night are not able to harvest energy. Furthermore, solar panels
dramatically decrease their efficiency when they collect dirt,
requiring constant maintenance [115]. This approach presents
additional challengers for freight wagons working in dusty
industries such as coal, iron ore, bauxite, etc.

Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
BERNAL et al.: ONBOARD CONDITION MONITORING SENSORS, SYSTEMS AND TECHNIQUES: A REVIEW
Table II shows the main characteristics of the reviewed
methods for powering onboard condition monitoring systems.
VI. C ONCLUDING R EMARKS
Comprehensive real-time condition monitoring for freight
wagons without onboard power is still a challenge for today’s
railway industry, and according to the findings of this literature
review paper, this issue is currently a dynamic area for research
and commercial developments. The main components for an
onboard condition monitoring device (sensor-node) such as
microelectromechanical sensors, microprocessors and trans-
ceivers become more accessible every day. At the same time,
signal processing algorithms and techniques are well estab-
lished and continue to develop, enabling a broad spectrum of
fault detection and isolation for different vehicle components.
The greatest barrier for implementing extensive WSNs for
monitoring freight trains in real-time is power consumption
at a reasonable cost. Several studies assess methodologies
for improving energy usage in sensor-nodes, most of them
from the algorithm and software perspective. Furthermore,
available energy harvesting technologies work only under
specific vehicle operating conditions and require additional
maintenance actions. Further research for power consumption
and cost reduction of real-time onboard condition monitoring
systems is required.
The vast amounts of data that might be acquired with the
additional condition monitoring applications as reviewed is not
useful unless it is transformed into information for efficiently
triggering and planning of maintenance actions [123]. Eventual
implementation of these technologies will not just open the
possibility of real-time monitoring for reactive or predictive
maintenance. Having a real-time onboard condition monitoring
system connected to an IoT network, constantly populating an
operating conditions database, enables advanced data analyt-
ics [124]. This way, maintenance efficiency and flexibility is
enhanced through advanced prognosis and big data analytics;
maintenance actions can be planned in advance and urgent
or reactive maintenance actions and unexpected downtimes
can be reduced. Furthermore, safety improvements and waste
reduction though minimizing derailment collateral damage can
be achieved, while component lifetimes can be extended.
A PPENDIX
See Table III for a detailed listing of the characteristics of
the reviewed onboard condition monitoring systems.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors appreciate the recommendations of the review-
ers, which improved this literature review.
R EFERENCES
[1] C. Ulianov and P. Hyde, “Deliverable D1.1: Benchmark and
market drivers for an integrated intelligent and lightweight
wagon solution,” in INNOWAG: Innovative Monitoring and
Predictive Maintenance Solutions on Lightweight Wagon,
Shift2Rail. INNOWAG Consortium, Mar. 2017. Accessed:
Sep. 10, 2018. [Online]. Available: http://newrail.org/innowag/wp-
content/uploads/2017/12/INNOWAG_D1.1_Benchmark-market-
drivers.pdf
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
21
[2] Deloitte Access Economics, “Value of rail—The contribution of rail in
Australia,” ARA, Canberra, ACT, Australia, Tech. Rep., 2017.
[3] M. Papaelias, A. Amini, Z. Huang, P. Vallely, D. Cardoso, and
S. Kerkyras, “Online condition monitoring of rolling stock wheels
and axle bearings,” Proc IMechE. F, J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 230,
no. 3, pp. 709–723, Dec. 2014. Accessed: Jun. 19, 2018, doi:
10.1177/0954409714559758.
[4] C. Tarawneh, J. A. Aranda, V. V. Hernandez, and C. J. Ramirez,
“An analysis of the efficacy of wayside hot-box detector data,”
presented at the ASME JRC, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2018. [Online].
Available: http://www.utrgv.edu/railwaysafety/_files/documents/
presentations/jrc2018_6218.pdf
[5] D. Jagan, C. Southern, A. Kane, and K. Bladon, “Managing the
Australian defined interstate rail network wayside condition monitoring
data,” in Proc. CORE, Adelaide, SA, Australia, 2014, pp. 210–217.
[6] Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator, “Rail safety report
2016–2017,” Office Nat. Rail Safety Regulator, Adelaide, SA,
Australia, Tech. Rep., 2017.
[7] M. A. Britton, S. Asnaashari, and G. J. M. Read, “Analysis of
train derailment cause and outcome in Victoria, Australia, between
2007 and 2013: Implications for regulation,” J. Transp. Safety Secur.,
vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 45–63, Jun. 2016. Accessed: Mar. 8, 2018,
doi: 10.1080/19439962.2015.1088906.
[8] C. Ulianov, “Investigation and guidelines on use of monitoring tech-
nologies for preventing and reducing the occurrence of freight train
derailments,” presented at the WCRR, 2013. [Online]. Available:
http://railknowledgebank.com
[9] C. Ulianov, F. Defossez, G. V. Franklin, and M. Robinson,
“Overview of freight train derailments in the EU: Causes, impacts,
prevention and mitigation measures,” in Traffic Safety: Research for
Innovative Transports Set, 1st ed. London, U.K.: ISTE, 2016, ch. 20,
pp. 319–336. [Online]. Available: http://www.iste.co.uk/book.php?id=979
[10] V. J. Hodge, S. O’Keefe, M. Weeks, and A. Moulds, “Wireless sensor
networks for condition monitoring in the railway industry: A survey,”
IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1088–1106,
Jun. 2015. Accessed: Aug. 9, 2017, doi: 10.1109/TITS.2014.2366512.
[11] C. Li, S. Luo, C. Cole, and M. Spiryagin, “An overview: modern
techniques for railway vehicle on-board health monitoring systems,”
Veh. Syst. Dyn., vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 1045–1070, Mar. 2017. Accessed:
Aug. 8, 2017, doi: 10.1080/00423114.2017.1296963.
[12] N. Bosso, A. Gugliotta, and N. Zampieri, “Design and testing of an
innovative monitoring system for railway vehicles,” Proc. Inst. Mech.
Eng. F, J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 232, no. 2, pp. 445–460, Oct. 2016.
Accessed: Mar. 3, 2018, doi: 10.1177/0954409716675005.
[13] S. Y. Chong, J-R. Lee, and H.-J, Shin, “A review of health and
operation monitoring technologies for trains,” Smart Struct. Syst.,
vol. 6, no. 9, pp. 1079–1105, 2010. Accessed: Mar. 3, 2018, doi:
10.12989/sss.2010.6.9.1079.
[14] On Track to 2040—Preparing the Australian Rail Supply Industry for
Challenges and Growth, Australian National Univ., Canberra, ACT,
Australia, 2013.
[15] J. Donelson et al., “Third generation on-board monitoring and control
system based on controller area network technology,” in Proc. IHHA,
Kiruna, Sweden, 2007, pp. 139–149.
[16] M. Macucci, S. Di Pascoli, P. Marconcini, and B. Tellini, “Wireless
sensor network for derailment detection in freight trains powered
from vibrations,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Workshop Meas. Netw. (M&N),
Coimbra, Portugal, 2015, pp. 1–6. Accessed: Sep. 20, 2017, doi:
10.1109/IWMN.2015.7322970.
[17] M. Macucci, S. Di Pascoli, P. Marconcini, and B. Tellini, “Derail-
ment detection and data collection in freight trains, based on a
wireless sensor network,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 65,
no. 9, pp. 1977–1987, May 2016. Accessed: Aug. 9, 2017, doi:
10.1109/TIM.2016.2556925.
[18] A. Jabłoński, M. Żegleń, W. Staszewski, P. Czop, and T. Barszcz, “How
to build a vibration monitoring system on your own?” in Advances
in Condition Monitoring of Machinery in Non-Stationary Operations,
vol. 9. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2017, doi: 10.1007/973-3-319-
61927-9_11.
[19] C. P. Ward et al., “Condition monitoring opportunities using vehicle-
based sensors,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. F, J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 225,
no. 2, pp. 202–218, Feb. 2011, doi: 10.1177/09544097JRRT406.
[20] A. Alemi, F. Corman, and G. Lodewijks, “Condition monitoring
approaches for the detection of railway wheel defects,” Proc. Inst.
Mech. Eng. F, J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 231, no. 8, pp. 961–981,
Jun. 2016. Accessed: Dec. 20, 2017, doi: 10.1177/0954409716656218.
22
[21] B. Guillaumin, “Safe and practical end of train for increased braking
performance and safety related applications,” in Proc. IHHA, Kiruna,
Sweden, 2007, pp. 617–622.
[22] J. Mu and J. Su, “Application of controllable EOT technology in heavy-
haul transport on Datong–Qinhuangdao line,” in Proc. IHHA, Shanghai,
China, 2009, pp. 696–702.
[23] Siemens, (2016), Locomotive System Products. Accessed: Jul. 6,
2018. [Online]. Available: https://w3.usa.siemens.com/mobility/
us/en/Documents/J1-J92%20Locomotive%20Systems.pdf
[24] Wabtec Corporation. (2018). Trainlink 4G ATX. Accessed:
Jul. 6, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.wabtec.com/
products/1332/trainlink%E2%84%A2-4g-atx
[25] M. McClanachan, B. Scown, D. Roach, D. Skerman, and B. Payne,
“Autonomous detection of severe wagon-track interaction dynamics,”
in Proc. IHHA, Brisbane, QLD, Australia, 2001, pp. 305–312.
[26] M. McClanachan, M. Dhanasekar, D. Skerman, and J. Davey, “Moni-
toring the dynamics of freight wagons,” in Proc. CORE, Wollongong,
NSW, Australia, 2002, pp. 213–221.
[27] R. S. Hartley, J. L. Swart, and J. M. Mulder, “Development of
an instrumented measuring wagon to monitor the performance of
electronically controlled pneumatic brakes,” in Proc. IHHA, New Delhi,
India, 2013, pp. 452–458.
[28] M. Darby, E. Alvarez, J. McLeod, G. Tew, and G. Crew,
“The development of an instrumented wagon for continuously monitor-
ing track condition,” in Proc. AusRAIL Plus, Sydney, NSW, Australia,
2003, pp. 1–7.
[29] J. Cowie, L. Taylor, B, Felsner, A. Stramare, and G. Hardie, “Use of
instrumented revenue vehicle to manage 40 tonne axle load operation
at Fortescue Metals Group Ltd,” in Proc. IHHA, Perth, WA, Australia,
2015, pp. 870–878.
[30] C. Thompson, P. Reichl, D. Zeng, J. White, F. Ahmed, and H. Sethi,
“Predictive maintenance approaches based on continuous monitoring
systems at Rio Tinto,” in Proc. CORE, Melbourne, VIC, Australia,
2016, pp. 1–7.
[31] J. Donelson et al., “On-board condition monitoring system performance
in a revenue service demonstration,” in Proc. Int. Heavy Haul Assoc.
Conf. (IHHA), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2005, pp. 571–578.
[32] R. W. Blank, L. S. Keegan, M. F. Stewart, and S. K. Punwani, “Vision
for safety and maintenance equipment in heavy haul operations,” in
Proc. Int. Heavy Haul Assoc. Conf. (IHHA), Shanghai, China, 2009,
pp. 646–652.
[33] W. C. Vantuono, “ECP finally taking hold: Thanks largely to a much-
needed jump start from the FRA, electronically controlled pneumatic
brakes are off and running. Will the momentum last?” Railway Age,
vol. 208, no. 8, pp. 17–21, Aug. 2007. Accessed: Jul. 6, 2018.
[34] A. Thomas, C. Cole, and C. Bosomworth, “A train health advisory
system for freight trains,” in Proc. Int. Heavy Haul Assoc. Conf.
(IHHA), Shanghai, China, 2009, pp. 889–895.
[35] Y. Sun, C. Cole, and C. Bosomworth, “Early detection of wheel
flats using wagon body acceleration measurements,” in Proc. CORE,
Wellington, New Zealand, 2010, pp. 230–239.
[36] K. Smith, “Wagon tracking opens up new avenues for VTG,” Int.
Railway J., Nov. 2017. Accessed: Jul. 11, 2018. [Online]. Avail-
able: https://www.railjournal.com/in_depth/wagon-tracking-opens-up-
new-avenues-for-vtg
[37] Nexiot. Globehopper. Accessed: Sep. 10, 2018. [Online]. Available:
https://www.nexiot.ch/globehopper
[38] Amsted Rail. IONX Asset Monitoring. Accessed: Jan. 19, 2018.
[Online]. Available: https://www.amstedrail.com/ionx
[39] Perpetuum. Rail Applications. Accessed: Aug. 21, 2017. [Online].
Available: https://perpetuum.com/rail-applications
[40] SKF. SKF Insight Rail. Accessed: Sep. 10, 2017. [Online]. Avail-
able: http://www.skf.com/group/industry-solutions/railways/condition-
monitoring/skf-insight-rail.html
[41] Railway Applications—Rolling Stock Equipment—Shock and Vibration
Test, document IEC 61373, 2010.
[42] M. Spiryagin, “Unpowered rail vehicle design,” in Design and Simula-
tion of Rail Vehicles, 1st ed. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press, 2014,
ch. 2.
[43] A. Bracciali, “Railway wheelsets: History, research and developments,”
in Proc. IJRT, 2016, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 23–52. Accessed: May 18, 2018,
doi: 10.4203/ijrt.5.1.2.
[44] J. Zeng, L. Wei, and P. Wu, “Safety evaluation for railway vehicles
using an improved indirect measurement method of wheel–rail forces,”
J. Mod. Transp., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 114–123, May 2016. Accessed:
May 5, 2018, doi: 10.1007/s40534-016-0107-5.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 19, NO. 1, JANUARY 1, 2019
[45] SNC-Lavalin. Instrumented Wheelset Technology (IWT). Accessed:
Feb. 2, 2018. [Online]. Available: http://www.snclavalin-railandtransit.
com/en-int/rolling-stock/instrumented-wheelset-technology
[46] G. Riggall and G. F. M. dos Santos, “Use of instrumented wheelset
to determine best bogie configuration for Vale under 37.5 tonne axle
loads,” in Proc. IHHA, Calgary, AB, Canada, 2011, pp. 1–9.
[47] CETEST. Instrumented Wheelset. Accessed: Sep. 9, 2017. [Online].
Available: http://www.cetestgroup.com/iws
[48] Railway Technology. (2016). CETEST: Instrumented Wheelset Technol-
ogy. Accessed: Sep. 6, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.railway-
technology.com/products/instrumented-wheelset
[49] Railway Technology. CETEST: Railway Accredited Testing and
Analysis Centre. Accessed: Sep. 6, 2018. [Online]. Available:
https://www.railway-technology.com/contractors/testing/cetest
[50] A. Bracciali, F. Cavaliere, and M. Macherelli, “Review of instrumented
wheelset technology and applications,” in Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Rail-
way Technol., Res., Develop., Maintenance, Stirlingshire, U.K., 2014,
pp. 1–16, doi: 10.4203/ccp.104.167.
[51] F. Xia, C. Cole, and P. Wolfs, “Wheel rail contact forces prediction
and validation with field tests,” in Proc. CORE, Perth, WA, Australia,
2008, pp. 73–82.
[52] F. Xia, C. Cole, and P. Wolfs, “Improving wagon running safety:
Predicting wagon instability during normal freight operations,” in Proc.
CORE, Melbourne, SA, Australia, 2006, pp. 287–294.
[53] Rail Express. (2009). World’s First Low Cost on-Board Train
Monitor: RIA. Accessed: Mar. 28, 2018. [Online]. Available:
http://railknowledgebank.com
[54] A. Matsumoto et al., “A new monitoring method of train derail-
ment coefficient,” in Proc. IET Int. Conf. Railway Condition Monit.,
Birmingham, U.K., 2006, pp. 136–140.
[55] A. Matsumoto et al., “Continuous observation of wheel/rail contact
forces in curved track and theoretical considerations,” Veh. Syst. Dyn.,
vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 349–364, Jul. 2012. Accessed: May 17, 2018, doi:
10.1080/00423114.2012.669130.
[56] A. Matsumoto et al., “Actual states of wheel/rail contact forces and
friction on sharp curves—Continuous monitoring from in-service trains
and numerical simulations,” Wear, vol. 314, nos. 1–2, pp. 189–197,
Jun. 2014. Accessed: Mar. 8, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.wear.2013.11.046.
[57] B. Stratman, Y. Liu, and S. Mahadevan, “Structural health monitoring
of railroad wheels using wheel impact load detectors,” J. Failure
Anal. Prevention, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 218–225, Jun. 2007. Accessed:
May 16, 2018, doi: 10.1007/s11668-007-9043-3.
[58] D. Barke and W. K. Chiu, “Structural health monitoring in the railway
industry: A review,” Struct. Health Monitor., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 81–94,
2005. Accessed: May 16, 2018, doi: 10.1177/1475921705049764.
[59] E. J. Bernal, R. M. Martinod, G. R. Betancur, and L. F. Castañeda,
“Partial-profilogram reconstruction method to measure the geomet-
ric parameters of wheels in dynamic condition,” Veh. Syst. Dyn.,
vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 606–616, Feb. 2016. Accessed: Jul. 28, 2017, doi:
10.1080/00423114.2016.1147588.
[60] R. S. Dwyer-Joyce, C. Yao, R. Lewis, and H. Brunskill, “An ultrasonic
sensor for monitoring wheel flange/rail gauge corner contact,” Proc.
Inst. Mech. Eng. F, J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 227, no. 2, pp. 188–195,
Aug. 2012. Accessed: Mar. 8, 2018, doi: 10.1177/0954409712460986.
[61] B. Frankenstein, D. Hentschel, E. Pridoehl, and F. Schubert, “Hollow
shaft integrated health monitoring system for railroad wheels,” Proc.
SPIE, vol. 5770, pp. 46–55, May 2005. Accessed: Mar. 13, 2018, doi:
10.1117/12.602310.
[62] N. Bosso, A. Gugliotta, and N. Zampieri, “Wheel flat
detection algorithm for onboard diagnostic,” Measurement,
vol. 123, pp. 193–202, Jul. 2018. Accessed: Apr. 4, 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.measurement.2018.03.072.
[63] M. Grudén, A. Westman, J. Platbardis, P. Hallbjorner, and A. Rydberg,
“Reliability experiments for wireless sensor networks in train environ-
ment,” in Proc. EuWIT, Rome, Italy, Sep. 2009, pp. 37–40.
[64] A. Amini, M. Entezami, and M. Papaelias, “Onboard detection of
railway axle bearing defects using envelope analysis of high fre-
quency acoustic emission signals,” Case Studies Nondestruct. Test.
Eval., vol. 6, pp. 8–16, Jun. 2016. Accessed: Sep. 9, 2017, doi:
10.1016/j.csndt.2016.06.002.
[65] A. Anastasopoulos, K. Bollas, D. Papasolouros, and D. Kourousis,
“Acoustic emission on-line inspection of rail wheels,” presented at the
Eur. Working Group Acoust. Emission, Vienna, Austria, Sep. 2010.
[66] M. Jones and J. Southcombe, “Track condition monitoring usin service
trains,” in Proc. AusRail Plus, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, 2015,
pp. 1–5.
BERNAL et al.: ONBOARD CONDITION MONITORING SENSORS, SYSTEMS AND TECHNIQUES: A REVIEW
[67] P. Weston, C. Roberts, G. Yeo, and E. Stewart, “Perspectives on railway
track geometry condition monitoring from in-service railway vehicles,”
Veh. Syst. Dyn., vol. 53, no. 7, pp. 1063–1091, Apr. 2015. Accessed:
Sep. 8, 2017, doi: 10.1080/00423114.2015.1034730.
[68] B. M. Wilson and R. Bury, “STC Logistics reduces the risk of bearing
failure,” in Proc. CORE, Wellington, New Zealand, 2010, pp. 386–396.
[69] S. M. Woods, “Development of algorithms and criteria for continuous
condition monitoring of railroad bearings,” M.S. thesis, Dept. Mech.
Eng., Univ. Texas-Pan Amer., Edinburg, TX, USA, 2012.
[70] J. A. Kypuros, C. M. Tarawneh, A. Zagouris, S. Woods, B. M. Wilson,
and A. Martin, “Implementation of wireless temperature sensors for
continuous condition monitoring of railroad bearings,” in Proc. ASME
Rail Transp. Division Fall Tech. Conf., Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2011,
pp. 97–105, doi: 10.1115/RTDF2011-67017.
[71] A. P. Arguelles, “Development of a vibration and temperature mea-
surement device for railroad bearings,” M.S. thesis, Dept. Mech. Eng.,
Univ. Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, TX, USA, 2012.
[72] C. M. Tarawneh, R. Estrada, B. M. Wilson, and A. Martin, “Field
implementation statistical analysis of an emerging bearing condi-
tion monitoring system,” in Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Railway Technol.,
Res., Develop. Maintenance, Stirlingshire, U.K., 2014, pp. 1–16, doi:
10.4203/ccp.104.236.
[73] SKF. (2007). SKF Insight. Next Generation Condition Monitoring.
Accessed: Jan. 12, 2018. [Online]. Available: http://www.skf.com/
group/products/condition-monitoring/skfinsight.html
[74] SKF. (2017). Using Wireless Condition Monitoring in the
Rail Sector. Accessed: Oct. 10, 2017. [Online]. Available:
http://www.skf.com/group/news-and-media/news-search/2017-06-
14-using-wireless-condition-monitoring-in-the-rail-sector.html
[75] R. Kovalev et al., “Freight car models and their computer-aided
dynamic analysis,” Multibody Syst. Dyn., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 399–423,
Nov. 2009. Accessed: May 16, 2018, doi: 10.1007/s11044-009-9170-6.
[76] The Railway Technical Site. (2018). Brakes. Accessed: Jun. 19, 2018.
[Online]. Available: http://www.skf.com/group/products/condition-
monitoring/skfinsight.html
[77] M. Aimar and A. Somà, “Study and results of an onboard brake
monitoring system for freight wagons,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. F, J. Rail
Rapid Transit, vol. 232, no. 5, pp. 1277–1294, Jul. 2017. Accessed:
Sep. 9, 2017, doi: 10.1177/0954409717720348.
[78] G. De Pasquale, A. Somà, and N. Zampieri, “Design, simulation, and
testing of energy harvesters with magnetic suspensions for the gener-
ation of electricity from freight train vibrations,” J. Comput Nonlinear
Dyn., vol. 7, no. 4, p. 041011, Jun. 2012. Accessed: Sep. 8, 2017, doi:
10.1115/1.4006920.
[79] S. D. Iwnicki, S. Stichel, A. Orlova, and M. Hecht, “Dynam-
ics of railway freight vehicles,” Vehicle Syst. Dyn., vol. 53,
no. 7, pp. 995–1033, May 2015. Accessed: Dec. 14, 2017, doi:
10.1080/00423114.2015.1037773.
[80] A. Semarano, “Reducing the occurrences and impact of freight
train derailments. Monitoring and supervision concepts and tech-
niques for derailments investigation,” presented at the D-RAIL Final
Workshop, Nov. 2014. [Online]. Available: http://www.d-rail-project.
eu/IMG/pdf/DR-WP4-10-141112-Final_Seminar_Stockholm.pdf
[81] H. Y. Tam, T. Lee, S. L. Ho, T. Haber, T. Graver, and A. Méndez,
“Utilization of fiber optic Bragg grating sensing systems for health
monitoring in railway applications,” in Proc. 6th Int. Workshop Struct.
Health Monitor., Stanford, CA, USA, 2007, pp. 1824–1831.
[82] W. Hubacher and P. Scheiber, “Derailment detector systems for
CFF/SBB rolling stock,” in Proc. Rail Int. Congr., vol. 31, 2000,
pp. 31–37.
[83] M. Kato and K. Terada, “Development of an evolution type train
protection system to prevent secondary accidents,” in Proc. Int. Rail
Safety Conf., Dublin, Republic of Ireland, 2006, pp. 1–10.
[84] T. Moshammer. (2017). Bogie Monitoring—Digital Bogie 4.0.
Accessed: Apr. 4, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.rssb.
co.uk/Library/groups-and-committees/VT-SIC-Bogie-Monitoring-
Presentation-Thomas-Moshammer.pdf
[85] T. Moshammer. (2017). Vehicle—Track—Interaction—System.
Accessed: Mar. 3, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.railtech.
com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/5_THomasMoshammer.pdf
[86] S. P. Singh, S. Chitti, S. K. Punwani, and M. F. Stewart, “On-board
detection of derailed wheel and wheel defects,” in Proc. JRCICE,
Pueblo, CO, USA, 2007, pp. 143–150.
[87] Bombardier. Innovation & Technology. Accessed: Sep. 4, 2017.
[Online]. Available: https://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation/
products-services/bogies/innovation-technology.html
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
23
[88] C. Gao, X. Hu, B. Wang, L. Guo, and W. Wang, “Design of train
ride quality testing system based on wireless sensor network,” in Proc.
Int. Conf. Electron. Mech. Eng. Inf. Technol., Harbin, China, 2011,
pp. 2636–2639, doi: 10.1109/EMEIT.2011.6023638.
[89] R. M. Goodall and C. Roberts, “Concepts and techniques for railway
condition monitoring,” in Proc. IET Int. Conf. Railway Condition
Monitor., Birmingham, U.K., 2006, pp. 90–95.
[90] S. Bruni, R. Goodall, T. X. Mei, and H. Tsunashima, “Control and
monitoring for railway vehicle dynamics,” Veh. Syst. Dyn., vol. 45,
nos. 7–8, pp. 743–779, Jun. 2007. Accessed: Nov. 29, 2017, doi:
10.1080/00423110701426690.
[91] S. Alfi, S. Bionda, S. Bruni, and L. Gasparetto, “Condition monitoring
of suspension components in railway bogies,” in Proc. 5th IET Conf.
Railway Condition Monitor. Non-Destruct. Test. (RCM), Derby, U.K.,
Nov. 2011, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1049/cp.2011.0613.
[92] X. Y. Liu, S. Alfi, and S. Bruni, “An efficient recursive least square-
based condition monitoring approach for a rail vehicle suspension
system,” Veh. Syst. Dyn., vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 814–830, Apr. 2016.
Accessed: Mar. 13, 2018, doi: 10.1080/00423114.2016.1164869.
[93] R. W. Ngigi, C. Pislaru, A. Ball, and F. Gu, “Modern techniques for
condition monitoring of railway vehicle dynamics,” J. Phys., Conf. Ser.,
vol. 364, no. 1, p. 012016, 2012.
[94] C. Li, S. Luo, C. Cole, M. Spiryagin, and Y. Sun, “A signal-based
fault detection and classification method for heavy haul wagons,” Veh.
Syst. Dyn., vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 1807–1822, Jun. 2017. Accessed:
Aug. 9, 2017, doi: 10.1080/00423114.2017.1334929.
[95] C. Li, S. Luo, C. Cole, and M. Spiryagin, “Bolster spring fault
detection strategy for heavy haul wagons,” Veh. Syst. Dyn., vol. 56,
no. 10, pp. 1604–1621, Jan. 2018. Accessed: Mar. 8, 2018, doi:
10.1080/00423114.2017.1423090.
[96] B. Brickle, R. Morgan, E. Smith, J. Brosseau, and C. Pin-
ney, “Identification of existing and new technologies for wheelset
condition monitoring,” TTCI, London, U.K., RSSB Rep. T607,
2008.
[97] J. Dybała and S. Radkowski, “Reduction of Doppler effect for the
needs of wayside condition monitoring system of railway vehicles,”
Mech. Syst. Signal Process., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 125–136, 2013, doi:
10.1016/j.ymssp.2012.03.003.
[98] R. Dwight and J. Jiang, “On-board wheel-rail noise monitoring for
the direction of track maintenance,” in Proc. CORE, Melbourne, VIC,
Australia, 2006, pp. 490–494.
[99] C. Vale et al., “Novel efficient technologies in europe for axle bearing
condition monitoring—The MAXBE project,” Transp. Res. Procedia,
vol. 14, pp. 635–644, Jun. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.trpro.2016.05.313.
[100] S. A. McInerny and Y. Dai, “Basic vibration signal processing
for bearing fault detection,” IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 46, no. 1,
pp. 149–156, Feb. 2003, doi: 10.1109/TE.2002.808234.
[101] R. B. Randall, Vibration-Based Condition Monitoring: Industrial,
Aerospace and Automotive Applications. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 2011.
[102] A. Gonzalez, “Development, optimization, and implementation of
vibration based defect detection algorithm, for railroad bearings,”
M.S. thesis, Dept. Mech. Eng., Univ. Texas-Pan Amer., Edinburg, TX,
USA, 2015.
[103] B. Nejikovsky and E. Keller, “Wireless communications based sys-
tem to monitor performance of rail vehicles,” in Proc. ASME/IEEE
Joint Railroad Conf., Newark, NJ, USA, 2000, pp. 111–124, doi:
10.1109/RRCON.2000.869993.
[104] T. X. Mei and H. Li, “Measurement of vehicle ground speed
using bogie-based inertial sensors,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. F,
J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 222, no. 2, pp. 107–116, Jun. 2008, doi:
10.1243/09544097JRRT154.
[105] H. Jayakumar, A. Raha, Y. Kim, S. Sutar, W. S. Lee, and
V. Raghunathan, “Energy-efficient system design for IoT devices,” in
Proc. 21st Asia South Pacific Design Autom. Conf. (ASP-DAC), Macau,
China, Jan. 2016, pp. 298–301, doi: 10.1109/ASPDAC.2016.7428027.
[106] A. Lo Schiavo, “Fully autonomous wireless sensor network for freight
wagon monitoring,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 16, no. 24, pp. 9053–9063,
Dec. 2016, doi: 10.1109/JSEN.2016.2620149.
[107] N. Sazak and M. Ertug, “The effect of node deployment scheme
on LWSN lifetime for railway monitoring applications,” in Proc.
IEEE Workshop Environ., Energy, Struct. Monitor. Syst. (EESMS),
Milan, Italy, Jul. 2017, pp. 1–4, doi: 10.1109/EESMS.2017.
8052692.
[108] W. Dargie, “Dynamic power management in wireless sensor networks:
State-of-the-art,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1518–1528,
May 2012, doi: 10.1109/JSEN.2011.2174149.
24
[109] R. J. Preece, T. M. Hanif, R. J. Amos, and E. J. C. Stewart,
“An energy management led approach to configuration and deployment
of energy harvesting data loggers to monitor trackside assets,” in Proc.
6th IET Conf. Railway Condition Monitor. (RCM), Birmingham, U.K.,
Sep. 2014, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1049/cp.2014.0990.
[110] H.-P. Tan, P. W. Q. Lee, W. K. G. Seah, and Z. A. Eu, “Impact of
power control in wireless sensor networks powered by ambient energy
harvesting (WSN-HEAP) for railroad health monitoring,” in Proc. Int.
Conf. Adv. Inf. Netw. Appl. Workshops, Bradford, U.K., May 2009,
pp. 804–809, doi: 10.1109/WAINA.2009.113.
[111] J. B. Hughes, G. D. Horler, and E. P. C. Morris, “An investigatory
study into transmission power control for wireless sensor networks
in railway applications,” in Proc. 7th IET Conf. Railway Condi-
tion Monitor. (RCM), Birmingham, U.K., Sep. 2016, pp. 1–8, doi:
10.1049/cp.2016.1189.
[112] B. Martinez, M. Montón, I. Vilajosana, and J. D. Prades,
“The power of models: Modeling power consumption for IoT devices,”
IEEE Sensors J., vol. 15, no. 10, pp. 5777–5789, Oct. 2015, doi:
10.1109/JSEN.2015.2445094.
[113] A. Somà and M. Aimar, “Study and design of a wireless monitoring
device for intermodal freight wagons,” in Proc. IAVSD, Rockhampton,
QLD, Australia, 2017, pp. 1051–1056.
[114] O. Brignole et al., “Resonant electromagnetic vibration har-
vesters feeding sensor nodes for real-time diagnostics and moni-
toring in railway vehicles for goods transportation: A numerical-
experimental analysis,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Power Electron. Motion
Control Conf. (PEMC), Varna, Bulgaria, 2016, pp. 456–461, doi:
10.1109/EPEPEMC.2016.7752040.
[115] A. Beagles, “SUSTRAIL concluding technical report,” Int. Union
Railways, Paris, France, Tech. Rep., 2015, vol. 1, p. 196. [Online].
Available: http://www.sustrail.eu
[116] R. W. Lewis, S. Maddison, and E. J. C. Stewart, “An extensible
framework architecture for wireless condition monitoring applications
for railway rolling stock,” in Proc. 6th IET Conf. Railway Condi-
tion Monitor. (RCM), Birmingham, U.K., Sep. 2014, pp. 1–6, doi:
10.1049/cp.2014.1008.
[117] M. Grudén et al., “Field operational testing for safety improvement
of freight trains using wireless monitoring by sensor network,” IET
Wireless Sensor Syst., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 54–60, Jun. 2014, doi:
10.1049/iet-wss.2013.0048.
[118] M. Gao, P. Wang, Y. Wang, and L. Yao, “Self-powered ZigBee
wireless sensor nodes for railway condition monitoring,” IEEE Trans.
Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 900–909, Mar. 2018, doi:
10.1109/TITS.2017.2709346.
[119] J. J. Wang, G. P. Penamalli, and L. Zuo, “Electromagnetic
energy harvesting from train induced railway track vibrations,”
in Proc. IEEE/ASME 8th IEEE/ASME Int. Conf. Mechatronic
Embedded Syst. Appl., Suzhou, China, Jul. 2012, pp. 29–34,
doi: 10.1109/MESA.2012.6275532.
[120] M. Gao, P. Wang, Y. Cao, R. Chen, and D. Cai, “Design and verification
of a rail-borne energy harvester for powering wireless sensor networks
in the railway industry,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 18, no. 6,
pp. 1596–1609, Jun. 2017, doi: 10.1109/TITS.2016.2611647.
[121] C. Nagode, M. Ahmadian, and S. Taheri, “Motion-based energy
harvesting devices for railroad applications,” in Proc. ASME/IEEE
Joint Rail Conf., Urbana, IL, USA, vol. 2, 2010, pp. 267–271, doi:
10.1115/JRC2010-36243.
[122] D. Vincent, “Deliverable D2.1: Overall measurement concept for
cargo condition monitoring system,” INNOWAG: Innovative Monitor.
predictive maintenance solutions lightweight wagon, Shift2Rail.
INNOWAG Consortium, Oct. 2017. Accessed: Sep. 10, 2018. [Online].
Available: http://newrail.org/innowag/wp-content/uploads/2017/
12/INNOWAG_D2.1_Cargo-condition-monitoring_Measurement-
concept.pdf
[123] G. Kress and B. Posner. (2016). Internet of Things in Motion:
Analytics and Transportation. Accessed: Dec. 18, 2017. [Online].
Available: https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/internet-of-things-in-
motion-analytics-and-transportation
Authorized licensed use limited to: VIT University. Downloaded on August 28,2022 at 06:35:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 19, NO. 1, JANUARY 1, 2019
[124] P. Fraga-Lamas, T. M. Fernández-Caramés, and L. Castedo, “Towards
the Internet of smart trains: A review on industrial IoT-connected
railways,” Sensors, vol. 17, no. 6, p. 1457, Jun. 2017, doi:
10.3390/s17061457.
[125] J. Donelson and R. L. Dicus, “Bearing defect detection using
on-board accelerometer measurements,” in Proc. ASME/IEEE Joint
Rail Conf., Washington, DC, USA, Apr. 2002, pp. 95–102, doi:
10.1109/RRCON.2002.1000100.
[126] SKF. (2017). SKF Insight Rail. Accessed: Sep. 5, 2017. [Online]. Avail-
able: http://www.skf.com/binary/30-302819/17140_2%20EN%20-
%20Insight%20PR_tcm_12-302819.pdf
Esteban Bernal received the B.S. degree in mechan-
ical engineering and the M.S. degree in engineer-
ing from EAFIT University, Medellín, Colombia,
in 2013 and 2016, respectively. He is currently
pursuing the Ph.D. degree in engineering with the
Centre for Railway Engineering, Central Queensland
University, Australia.
From 2014 to 2016, he was a Research Assistant
with the GEMI Research Group, EAFIT University,
where he collaborated in developing a prototype for
automated measuring of train wheel profiles.
His research interests include condition monitoring, signal processing, and
railway vehicle dynamics.
Maksym Spiryagin received the Ph.D. degree in
the field of railway transport from East Ukrainian
National University in 2004. He is currently
the Deputy Director of the Centre for Rail-
way Engineering, Central Queensland University.
Prof. Spiryagin’s involvement in academia and rail-
way industry projects includes research experi-
ence in Australia, China, Italy, South Korea, and
Ukraine involving locomotive design and traction,
rail vehicle dynamics, acoustics and real-time and
software-enabled control systems, mechatronics, and
the development of complex mechatronic systems using various approaches
(co-simulation, software-in-the-loop, processor-in-the-loop, or hardware-in-
the loop simulations). He has authored four books and more than 130 other
scientific publications and holds 20 patents as one of the inventors.
Colin Cole received the Ph.D. degree from Central
Queensland University, Australia, in 1999. His Ph.D.
dissertation was on longitudinal train dynamics mod-
eling. He has been with the Australian rail industry
since 1984, starting with six years in mechanized
track maintenance for Queensland Railways. Then
he focused on a research and consulting career
involving work on track maintenance, train and
wagon dynamics, train control technologies, and the
development of on-board devices. He is currently
the Director of the Centre for Railway Engineering,
Central Queensland University. He is extensively engaged with industry via
the previous two nationally funded Rail CRC programs, and has continuing
involvement via the Australian Centre for Rail Innovation and the new Rail
Manufacturing CRC. He has authored or co-authored over 120 technical
papers, two books, one book chapter, and numerous commercial research
and consulting reports, and has developed two patents relating to in-cabin
locomotive technologies.