ERTMS/ETCS – Class 1
Test Sequence Validation and Evaluation
REF : SUBSET-076-6-7
ISSUE : 1.0.2
DATE : 25-February-2009
Company Technical Approval Management approval
ALSTOM ANSALDO SIGNAL BOMBARDIER INVENSYS RAIL SIEMENS THALES
? This document has been developed and released by UNISIG
Test Sequence Validation and Evaluation Page 1/15 SUBSET-076-6-7
1.0.2
1. MODIFICATION HISTORY
Issue Number Date Section Number Modification / Description Author 0.0.1 All Creation of the document Raúl Martín & Daniel 10-November-2005 Molina (CEDEX)
1.0.0 All Edition for delivery after including Raúl Martín & Daniel 04-November-2005 the modifications given by the Test Molina (CEDEX)
Specs WG members at Strasbourg
meeting (20-Nov-2005)
1.0.1 01-April-2008 All Alignment to SRS 2.3.0 Oscar Rebollo 1.0.2-25-February 3 and 4 Alignment of references Oscar Rebollo 2009
? This document has been developed and released by UNISIG
Test Sequence Validation and Evaluation Page 2/15 SUBSET-076-6-7
1.0.2
2. TABLE OF CONTENT
1. MODIFICATION HISTORY ......................................................................................................................... 2
2. TABLE OF CONTENT ................................................................................................................................ 3
3. OBJECTIVE ................................................................................................................................................. 4
4. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................ 5
5. TEST SEQUENCES EVALUATION ....................................................................................................... 6 6. TEST SEQUENCES VALIDATION ........................................................................................................ 8 6.1 Types of validation ranges (time or distance) ................................................................................ 8
6.1.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................... 8
6.1.2 Validation based on time intervals ................................................................................... 8
6.1.3 Validation according to distance intervals ........................................................................ 8
6.1.4 Situations in which distance ranges will be used .............................................................. 9
6.2 Validation ranges in the different interfaces ................................................................................... 9
6.2.1 BTM ................................................................................................................................. 9
6.2.2 RTM................................................................................................................................. 9
6.2.3 DMI ................................................................................................................................ 11
6.2.4 TIU ................................................................................................................................ 12
6. 3 Validation when the speed of the train is zero ................................................................................. 14
? This document has been developed and released by UNISIG
Test Sequence Validation and Evaluation Page 3/15 SUBSET-076-6-7
1.0.2
3. OBJECTIVE
3.1.1.1.1 The objective of this document is providing a set of rules related to the way in which Test
Sequences must be evaluated and to the validation ranges which will be used when testing
ERTMS/ETCS onboard equipments according to the UNISIG Test Specification:
SUBSET-076 and considering the way in which Test Sequences have been agreed to be
written in the Test Specification Work Package.
? This document has been developed and released by UNISIG
Test Sequence Validation and Evaluation Page 4/15 SUBSET-076-6-7
1.0.2
4. REFERENCES
[1] Test Sequences.SUBSET-076-6-3. v2.3.1
[2] FFFIS Juridical Recorder-Downloading tool, SUBSET-027 v2.3.0 [3] System Requirement Specification. SUBSET-026. v2.3.0 [4] Test cases. SUBSET-076-5-2. v2.3.1
? This document has been developed and released by UNISIG
Test Sequence Validation and Evaluation Page 5/15 SUBSET-076-6-7
1.0.2
5. TEST SEQUENCES EVALUATION
5.1.1.1.1 The Test Sequence contains a list of steps with the corresponding description and additional
information. The evaluation of the Test Sequence has to be done step by step.
5.1.1.1.2 One of the data attached to the step is the interface, where the check has to be done.
According to the interface nature, the steps are classified in the following categories:
5.1.1.1.2.1 Input (BTM, DMI, RTM, TIU). The inputs in the ERTMS/ETCS on board equipment are, in
fact, an output from the lab environment. In this case, the evaluation of the step consists
on checking if the lab has produced the corresponding entry within the expected time and
distance (i.e, balise telegram delivery, driver action, etc). It is the task of Unisig Test
Specs WG to define the margins of time and distance, where the step may occur during a
sequence execution.
5.1.1.1.2.2 Output (DMI, RTM, TIU, JRU). The outputs from the ERTMS/ETCS on board equipment
are the reactions to the programmed entries. For the evaluation, it has to be checked,
firstly, if the event has been produced. In second place, it has to be checked at what
distance and time it happened. It is the task of Unisig Test Specs WG to define the
margins of time and distance, where the step shall be considered as passed. The DMI
and JRU interfaces are specially critical. In these cases when an inconsistency
exists between the SRS and the related subsets, the validation of these steps shall
be done according to the SUBSET 026 v2.3.0
5.1.1.1.2.3 No interface. Some steps within the Test Sequence have no interface attached. They can
be classified as follows:
5.1.1.1.2.3.1 The steps are merely informative. Consequently no check at all is needed. 5.1.1.1.2.3.2 The steps describe an internal functionality that can not be checked at the standard
interfaces. An alternative way of checking is proposed (for instance “deduction from other
tests”).
5.1.1.1.2.3.3 The steps describe an internal functionality and can be checked at the standard
interfaces.
5.1.1.1.3 Results evaluation:
? This document has been developed and released by UNISIG
Test Sequence Validation and Evaluation Page 6/15 SUBSET-076-6-7
1.0.2
5.1.1.1.3.1 The evaluating lab will be in charge to classify all steps of all the sequences belonging to
Subset 076 as passed or non-passed. Non-passed steps will be provided with the
corresponding reason.
5.1.1.1.3.2 NoBos together with the company and the evaluating lab have to analyze the non-passed
steps to explain and justify the reason of non passing. As a result of these analyses the
NoBos could modify the previous step classification in the following way: 5.1.1.1.3.2.1 If the Non Conformity is safety related (e.g.: not performed Change of Mode, Emergency
Brake not triggered, Service Brake not triggered...), then the step is non-passed,
5.1.1.1.3.2.2 If the Non Conformity leads to a non interoperable behaviour then the step is non-passed
and it should be referred to the related SRS or other TSI doc. requirement(s); 5.1.1.1.3.2.3 Elsewise, if the Non Conformity is related to some SRS or other TSI doc. discrepancy
then the step is passed with comments and it should be referred to the related SRS
requirement(s);
5.1.1.1.3.2.4 Elsewise, if the Non Conformity is a Remark, then the related step is passed with
comments and the Eurocab provider has to answer to the remark.
5.1.1.1.4 The Test Sequence shall be considered as passed when there is no step marked as
non-passed. As an aid, the Notified Bodies can employ any documentation on the TSI
(FFFIS, FIS and so on). In any case, for the Test Sequence evaluation, the SUBSET 026 [3],
shall prevail over any other subset, including the Test Specification itself. It is the duty of the
Notified Body to perform the evaluation keeping this general principle in case of
contradictions. At the end it will be useful to have the list of requirements non fulfilled,
ambiguities, contradictions in the final NoBo report.
? This document has been developed and released by UNISIG
Test Sequence Validation and Evaluation Page 7/15 SUBSET-076-6-7
1.0.2
6. TEST SEQUENCES VALIDATION
6.1 Types of validation ranges (time or distance)
6.1.1 Overview
6.1.1.1.1 Most of the situations specified in the steps of the Test Sequences will be validated based
on time intervals.
6.1.1.1.2 The specific situations in which distance ranges are more useful will be written in the third
point of this section.
6.1.2 Validation based on time intervals
6.1.2.1.1 All the test sequences have the distance at which the step must be checked, written in each
one of the steps. The validation range is defined in the following way:
6.1.2.1.1.1 The train gets to the distance written in the step in time “t” (if there are exceptions, and
another “t” must be used as the base of the interval, it will be clearly explained in the
following sections).
6.1.2.1.1.2 The range which will be used for the validation is [t – t1, t + t2].
6.1.2.1.1.3 t1 and t2 will be defined for each interface
6.1.2.1.1.4 Each interface can have different t1 and t2 for different situations. For example, in the
DMI interface, a different range can be used when the DMI displays something, or when
the driver inputs something to the DMI-note that it takes more time for the driver to act on
the DMI-. The durations t1 and t2 will be specified in the following sections, taking into
account the different situations which can be found in each interface
6.1.3 Validation according to distance intervals
6.1.3.1.1 All the test sequences have the distance at which the step must be checked, written in each
one of the steps. The validation range is defined in the following way:
6.1.3.1.1.1 The distance of the step is the basis of the interval, which will be called “d”
? This document has been developed and released by UNISIG
Test Sequence Validation and Evaluation Page 8/15 SUBSET-076-6-7
1.0.2
6.1.3.1.1.2 The range which will be used for the validation is [d – d1, d + d2].
6.1.3.1.1.3 d1 and d2 will be defined for each interface, if needed.
6.1.3.1.1.4 Each interface can have different d1 and d2 for different situations. 6.1.3.1.1.5 As the general rule for validation is time intervals, the situations which require distance
ranges will be specified in the following point.
6.1.4 Situations in which distance ranges will be used
6.1.4.1.1.1 When the speed of the train is zero (see chapter 6.3). Note that if mutually dependent
events occur at standstill the validation of these shall be based on the distance and the
time.
6.2 Validation ranges in the different interfaces
6.2.1 BTM
6.2.1.1.1 The on board equipment cannot be validated in these steps. It is not possible to check if the
BTM has received the telegrams sent by a group of balises -at least in the BTM steps,
although this is checked in the following JRU steps-. Therefore these steps are used to
check if the laboratory has sent each balise telegram in the group of balises in the expected
position, i. e. the train has been stimulated in the right moment:
6.2.1.1.1.1 t1: 1s
6.2.1.1.1.2 t2: 1s
6.2.2 RTM
6.2.2.1 How radio messages are written in the Test Sequences
6.2.2.1.1 When a dialog of radio messages is specified between the trackside and the train in a Test
? This document has been developed and released by UNISIG
Test Sequence Validation and Evaluation Page 9/15 SUBSET-076-6-7
1.0.2
Sequence, the following rules apply:
6.2.2.1.1.1 Mostly messages -track to train and train to track-are written in the same distance
although the train is moving.
6.2.2.1.1.2 A time “delay” can be added to the track to train messages. This means that, when the
train gets to the distance of the step in time t, the message is sent by the laboratory at t +
delay. This way, although most of the messages are written in the same step distance,
by means of the delay, the time in which they are sent can be fixed. This is the
mandatory way of specifying radio dialogs when the train is at stand still. When the train
is moving, it is not necessary to use the delays, but they should be used, so that the
radio dialogs are always specified in the same way.
6.2.2.1.1.3 The messages train to track are also written in the same distance, No delay is
associated to them. If there is a train to track message, and in the sequence of steps it
appears after a track to train message, this message shall be found after the previous
track to train message, and the distance written in the step is not taken into account (if it
is the same as the one in the track to train message, as mentioned before). 6.2.2.1.1.4 A “back delay” can also be added to the track to train messages. If it is added, it is also
checked that a train to track message was received in the interval which is set by the
“back delay”. This interval can be defined as a time or distance. Therefore, it is not
necessary to define any range in this document for the “back delays”. The back delay
itself is the range to be used for the validation, and it has already been written in each
sequence.
6.2.2.2 Inputs (messages track to train)
6.2.2.2.1 The on board equipment cannot be validated in these steps. It is not possible to check if the
RTM has received the radio messages (at least in these steps, since this is checked in the
following JRU steps). Therefore these steps are used to check if the laboratory has sent the
radio messages in the expected position i. e. the train has been stimulated in the right
moment. The range which must be used for the validation is (supposing an error free
transmission):
6.2.2.2.1.1 [t - t1, t + t2], where t is the time when the train gets to the distance of the step, plus the
delay associated to the RTM message
? This document has been developed and released by UNISIG
Test Sequence Validation and Evaluation Page 10/15 SUBSET-076-6-7
1.0.2