Published in EI – Eisenbahningenieur 11/ 2020 p46-50

Precise track surveying with an inertial measure-

ment and navigation measuring system
Approval according to EN 13848-3 with an inertial measuring and navigation
measuring system as acceptance measuring system on the Universal Tamping
Machine 4.0 of System7

Christoph Kuttelwascher Bernhard Lichtberger Paul Mittermayr

Summary
An inertial track geometry approval system was integrated into the System7 universal tamp-
ing machine 4.0. A suitable test track was selected on tracks of the Austrian Federal Railways
(ÖBB) with requirements for prescribed geometric elements and minimum specifications for
standard deviations of longitudinal height and direction. ÖBB experts accompanied the
measuring campaign. Independent experts checked the repeatability and reproducibility of
the test runs. The measured path differences of the different test runs showed hardly any
drift, the sum distribution of all measurements, as well as the comparison of the test runs
with the machine turned, clearly complied with the limit values. The suitability of the inertial
measuring and navigation measuring system installed on the universal tamping machine 4.0
for acceptance measurements could be proven.

Requirements for approval measurement systems

All construction or maintenance work on the track must be checked for conformity with the
contractual agreements (quality and quantity of work) after completion. The European basis
for such acceptance tests for track work is ÖNORM EN 13231-1. The scope of the tests de-
pends on the type of work carried out.
Since most of the track work directly affects the track position, track geometry measure-
ments are carried out to verify the track position before the track is released for regular op-
eration. The achieved quality of the track geometry must be verified with track measuring
vehicles or with track construction and maintenance machines. A prerequisite for this is that
the track measuring vehicles comply with the specifications of ÖNORM EN 13848-2 and the
track construction and maintenance machines with ÖNORM EN 13848-3. Today's tamping
machines meet these specifications. They are therefore suitable for acceptance measure-
ments in the course of track construction work.
For the acceptance of tamping work, a distinction is made between provisional and final ac-
ceptance. A track is provisionally accepted immediately after completion of the tamping
work to start operation until final acceptance. The final acceptance is carried out within a pe-
riod defined by the client, which depends on the type of work carried out. For the final ac-
ceptance of renewal and new construction work, an additional remeasurement with quali-
fied measuring systems is required at ÖBB.

Page 1 of 9
For acceptance of the track geometry, the following measurement parameters are recorded
and checked in Austria: direction, longitudinal height, cant, twist, track gauge and absolute
data. Compliance with the limit values in accordance with ÖBB regulations 07.07 guarantees
a safe track position and a high track position quality. The precision of the measurement is of
decisive importance for the safety and comfort of rail traffic and sustainability of the track
position.
In Austria, rail-bound track maintenance machines require a technical operating permit
based on the criteria of ÖNORM EN14033-2. In addition, track-laying and maintenance ma-
chines with included track geometry measuring systems must meet the accuracy require-
ments specified in ÖNORM EN 13848-3. In order to guarantee reliable measurement results
over a complete maintenance season, ÖBB requires and controls annual repeatability meas-
urements for each tamping machine used. In case of unacceptable deviations, recalibrations
are necessary or, if necessary, the measuring systems have to be changed.
The company System7 railsupport GmbH developed a new universal tamping machine. One
of the innovations realized in this universal tamping machine was the development of an ac-
ceptance track measuring system with inertial and navigation measuring system.
The inspection of inertial track geometry measuring systems on track maintenance machines
represents a national and international novelty. In order to guarantee the transparency of
the evaluation, ÖBB commissions internationally experienced experts in the field of inertial
measurement.

Requirements for the measuring track and implementation

The basis for carrying out the measurement runs required by the standard is a measuring
track that meets the geometric requirements (Table 1). The relatively high standard devia-
tions according to the currently valid ÖNORM EN13848-3 are difficult to find in modern track
infrastructures with simultaneously very good superstructure condition (rails, sleepers, fas-
tenings, ...).

Description Requirements
Straight Available in the measuring section
Left curve Radius ≤ 1.500 m
Right curve Radius ≤ 1.500 m
Transition curve sections Available in the measuring section
Cant ≥ 70 mm
Longitudinal height Standard deviation ≥ 2,0 mm
Direction Standard deviation ≥ 1,2 mm

Table 1: Requirements for the measuring track according to ÖNORM EN 13848-3

The operational execution of measurement runs represents a challenge for the infrastruc-
ture operator, since track lengths of at least 500m have to be used several times at some-
times very low speeds (1 km/h). In order to avoid unnecessarily long track possessions, there
should also be a turning possibility in the immediate neighbourhood. After extensive re-
search, a suitable track section in the Linz area of the ÖBB (Austrian Federal Railways) was
identified for the measurements (Fig. 1).
Before tamping operations, the geometric track position correction data are determined by
the infrastructure operator. These result from the comparison of the actual track geometry

Page 2 of 9
with the target track geometry. This process is called pre-measurement. At ÖBB, iGleisgeom-
etrie is the central database (nominal geometry data, reference points, post-measurement
documentation, ...). This database compares the measured data generated by different
measuring systems and track-laying machines with the nominal values.
All elements of the line design are thus centrally checked for conformity with standards.
Only then is the correction data digitally transferred to the tamping machines to produce the
specified track geometry. The remeasurement data from the tamping machines are also digi-
tally transferred to the track database iGleisgeometrie. After a quality check by ÖBB special-
ists, the final acceptance is carried out. All tamping inserts and their quality (any deviations
from the nominal data) are centrally recorded and documented in Austria.

Fig. 1: Selected track section (red circle) and turning possibility (green triangle). (Map background: © Open-
StreetMap and contributors, CC-BY-SA)

Inertial and navigation measurement system

The measurement technology widely used today in maintenance machines uses physical
pendulums to measure cant and chord measurement systems to record direction (versine)
and height (longitudinal height). A chord, usually with a length of 10m and a division of 5m
to 5m or 4m to 6m is used between two chord trolleys guided by the machine in the track.
With the selected division of the chord, a third carriage is guided, which usually scans the
position of a central chord with potentiometer-based encoders. The height position of both
rails is calculated from the longitudinal height of the centre chord and the measured cants.
With the versine formula
𝑎∙𝑏
𝑓=
2𝑅

the distance of the chord to the rail can be calculated. It means:

a ... short chord section
b ... long tendon section
R ... track curve radius
f ... versine

Page 3 of 9
The chord measurement systems have proven themselves in practice, but have disad-
vantages. Measuring the cant with a physical pendulum, for example, limits the measuring
speed. The resulting centrifugal forces deflect the pendulum and falsify the result. In many
countries the exact position of the exact track and transition curves is not known exactly. In
these countries, the track position is recorded with the existing machine measuring systems
before work starts and from this information, the nominal track geometry and correction
values for guiding the tamping machine are determined. The measuring speed with physical
pendulums for sufficient accuracy is about 3 km/h.

Fig. 2: Transfer functions of a symmetrical 5/5m and an asymmetrical 4/6m chord

Depending on the wavelength of the track fault, chord measurements distort the recording
adversely. Transfer functions describe this system behaviour.
The transfer functions in Fig. 2 show the gain on the left and the phase shift of a symmetrical
(blue line) and an asymmetrical (orange line) chord on the right. Symmetrical chords have no
phase shift of the measured error wavelength. On the other hand, they have zero points
(e.g. at 5m) and a maximum error gain of two. Chord measurement systems record track de-
fects that are deformed in magnitude (gain), shape and local position (phase). Defect wave-
lengths in the range of 3-25m (D1 band) are relevant for acceptance for maintenance work.
With the inertial and navigation measuring system of System7, measuring speeds of up to
30km/h are possible. Inertial measurement systems detect track position errors in the wave-
length range of interest in the correct size and shape. An inertial measurement and naviga-
tion measurement system or IMU measurement system consists of three fiber optic gyros
(FOG) and three precision inclinometers. During a short initialization phase (2-3 min) the sys-
tem determines the position of the center of gravity (z-axis) and by measuring the move-
ment of the gyros with the earth the north direction (x-axis). The third axis (y-axis) is se-
lected orthogonal to the other two axes. If the machines stop for a short time (10 s), the sys-
tem calibrates automatically. The accelerometers, in conjunction with the inertial measure-
ment unit (IMU), allow the indication of absolute spatial angles. The indication of the direc-
tion angle (the compass direction) is not relevant for railroad vehicles, because they are
track-bound.
The measured angle pattern is filtered and the spatial curve of the track is calculated by sim-
ple integration over the length of the curve. The projection of this space curve on the xy-
plane results in the layout ("map view") and the projection on the yz-plane results in the
height in longitudinal direction of the track. The versions and longitudinal heights, which are
usually related to chords in the railroad, are calculated from the layout and the elevation im-
age. For a determination of the real undistorted track defects in a certain wavelength range
(D1-band or D2-band of 25-70m) the measured data are filtered accordingly.
Page 4 of 9
Fig. 3: Schematic representation of the IMU measuring trolley with indication of the degrees of freedom and
the coordinate axes

The track geometry parameters are scanned with two pairs of wheels (Fig. 3). The left wheel
pair is fixed to the car frame, the right wheel pair is designed to rotate. A high-resolution ab-
solute encoder records the angle of twist. This allows the trolley to adapt freely to the track
twist. The north-based navigation system is located in the middle of a console which is con-
nected to the car. In order for the IMU measurement car to follow the track without con-
straint, it must have five degrees of freedom. These are three degrees of rotation and two
degrees of displacement. The rotational degrees of freedom correspond to the direction an-
gle, inclination angle and cant angle. The degrees of freedom of displacement correspond to
the vertical stroke and the transverse displacement of the measuring trolley. The rotations
are made possible by a ball joint, the displacements by a horizontal linear slide and vertically
by guide columns. To ensure that the wheels of the measuring carriage are guided precisely
on the outer rail of the sheet, the carriage is pressed on by pneumatic cylinders. In order to
prevent the measuring carriage from derailing, vertical cylinders simultaneously press the
measuring carriage downwards. Two conditions must be fulfilled for proper function:
The push-through condition

𝐹! ≥ 𝜇 ∙ 𝑄 = 𝜇 ∙ 𝑚 ∙ 𝑔

(the lateral displacement force must be greater than the frictional force) and on the other
hand the derailment safety condition

𝑌 𝐹%
. 0 =. 0 ≤ 1,2
𝑄 "#$ 𝜇 ∙ 𝑚 ∙ 𝑔 "#$

Page 5 of 9
(the vertical force must prevent the wheels from climbing).
Y ... Lateral force
Q ... wheel contact force
μ ... Coefficient of friction wheel-rail
m ... Car mass
g ... Acceleration due to gravity
FV ... Vertical force
FH ... Horizontal force

For safe and precise guidance in the track, the lateral force cylinder and vertical cylinder are
designed separately. This guarantees that the above-mentioned conditions are maintained
even under varying friction conditions.

Proof of compliance with the requirements of EN13848-3 of the IMU meas-

urement system
The assessment of measuring systems for track laying and maintenance machines is de-
scribed in EN 13848-3 [4].

Fig. 4: Optimum shift (left scale) to maximize the covariance (right scale) of two measurement runs using the
direction as an example

Central terms are the repeatability and reproducibility of track parameters. The degree of
agreement between two successive measurements of the same parameter under the same
conditions (speed, direction of measurement, orientation and environmental conditions) on
the same track section is called repeatability. If the above-mentioned conditions vary, this is
called reproducibility. The standard specifies different limit values for the two comparison

Page 6 of 9
scenarios in Annex C. Parameters to be tested are longitudinal height, direction, track gauge,
cant and twist. The track geometry measurements should be carried out on a loaded track.
This requirement has resulted from the use of track measuring vehicles; in the past, hand-
held measuring devices were used. Due to this paradigm shift, the track stiffness - although
not measured - is now also considered to be a not negligible factor for the track geometry
quality (see [7]).

After calibration, a validation in the form of comparisons of different measuring runs on the
same track section has to be performed. In EN 13484-3, section 6, the requirements for the
necessary test runs of the field test are described. As there are no special track geometry
test cars, a smaller number of test runs is required compared to EN 13848 2. Table 2 of the
standard describes the required test runs with minimum and maximum speed, direction of
travel and vehicle orientation. In Table 3, the required comparisons are defined differently
according to repeatability and reproducibility. The additional requirements for the test track
are also specified.

Fig. 5: Analysis of the deviations (right scale in mm) using the example of the superelevation (left scale in mm);
the red lines mark the 95% percentile values of the reproducibility of the superelevation; csv endings
refer to Excel tables used

The statistical analysis of two test runs each is based on the distribution of the differences. A
prerequisite for this is precise synchronization of the recorded signals. Scanning is carried
out in path-dependent equal intervals of no more than 0.5 m. Due to the slip, differences in
the stationing can occur. In pr EN 13848-3:2020 the synchronization is described as neces-
sary and it is suggested to compensate the drift in short distance sections of e.g. 200m by
signal shifting. The method of cross-correlation is to be used for this purpose. Another inter-
esting method of dynamic time warping is described in Xu et al [8]. With careful measure-
ment, constant speed and short measurement lengths compared to special track geometry

Page 7 of 9
measurement cars, these effects are small but not negligible. Fig. 4 shows the necessary
path offset over the individual samples of the measurements.
In the next step a sum distribution of the absolute values of the same parameters of two
measurement runs is calculated (Fig. 5).
The differences show hardly any drift and remain well below the limit values. The 95th per-
centile value is used for evaluation. This is best visible by displaying the sum distribution in a
probability plot. The quantiles of the distribution are plotted equidistant on the abscissa and
the assigned function values on the ordinate. In the probability plot of the normal distribu-
tion, a standard normally distributed random variable appears as a straight line.

Fig. 6: Sum distribution in % of the measurement travel differences to check the reproducibility of the cant

Fig. 6 shows that not only the cumulative distribution of all measurements, but also the com-
parisons of the measurements with rotated machine are clearly below the limit value. This is
the proof of compliance with the prescribed limits for the tested north-based acceptance
measurement system of System7.

Authors:
Dipl.-Ing. Christoph Kuttelwascher, Manager track construction technology ÖBB
Dr. Paul Mittermayr, CEO BAMM
Univ.-Doz. Dr. techn. Bernhard Lichtberger
Technical Director System7 railsupport GmbH
bernhard.lichtberger@s7-rs.com

Page 8 of 9
References:
[1] ÖBB-Regelwerk 07.04 Vermessung von Gleisen und Weichen
[2] ÖNORM EN 13231-1 Bahnanwendungen - Oberbau - Abnahme von Arbeiten - Teil 1: Ar-
beiten im Schotteroberbau - Gleise, Weichen und Kreuzungen
[3] ÖNORM EN 13848-2 Bahnanwendungen - Oberbau - Geometrische Gleislagegüte - Teil
2: Messsysteme - Gleismessfahrzeuge
[4] EN13848-3 Bahnanwendungen - Oberbau - Gleislagequalität - Teil 3: Messsysteme -
Gleisbau- und Instandhaltungsmaschinen
[5] ÖBB-Regelwerk 07.07 Abnahme von Oberbauarbeiten
[6] ÖNORM EN14033-2 Bahnanwendungen - Oberbau - Schienengebundene Bau- und In-
standhaltungsmaschinen - Teil 2: Technische Anforderungen an die Versetzfahrt und die
Arbeitsstellung
[7] Presle, G., Hanreich, W., Mittermayr, P.: The Austrian track testing and recording car
EM250: A source for wheel/rail interaction analysis, TRB 2000
[8] Xu, P., Liu, R.-K., Sun, Q.-X., Jiang, L.: Dynamic-Time-Warping-Based Measurement Data
Alignment Model for Condition-Based Railroad Track Maintenance, IEEE Transactions on
Intelligent Transportation Systems 16(2), April 2015

Page 9 of 9