TRATIM Help

[Legolash2o]

I apologies in advance is there isn't enough information for anyone to answer these.

I've received some TRATIM output files but I'm struggling to figure out three of the columns, which I'm suspecting are the company or method used. The three columns are underlined and emboldened in the example at the bottom.

Column 1 Possible values:

• TPT - Train Performance Team
• ER&D - Engineering Research and Development
• DMEE - Director of Mechanical & Electrical Engineering

Column 2 Possible values

• AEAT - AEA Technologies
• BRR - British Rail Research?
• BRB - ? British Rail Board?
• REY - ?
• DNC - ? (Used by TPT and DMEE above)
• NHG - ?

Column 3 Possible values: An acronym of technique that as used?

• IMP - ?
• PPH - ? (Used mostly by REY above, ER&D have done it once).
• PPM - ? (Used mostly by REY above, NHG have done it once).

-----EXTRACT----
**** TRATIM ROUTE DATA DBG.B203.0FA
DBGB2030FA @B BRISTOL T M - PONTYPOOL
# B TPT AEAT --/02/81 ML FROM SEVERN TUNNEL JN - MAINDEE E JN

D = 246.19 -M IMP MLN1 ---------------------

119.09
118.98 -464
118.85 -646
118.78 -220
118.66 -134
118.50 150
...

 

[The Planner]

Only ever seen the printed TRATIM tables for running time calculations, didn't think this stuff was still out there! They were always shown as AEA technology so you have that bit right!

 

[Legolash2o]

Only ever seen the printed TRATIM tables for running time calculations, didn't think this stuff was still out there! They were always shown as AEA technology so you have that bit right!

It's fun looking at them! Not sure if I'm allowed to share them so playing it safe.

The part on the sample is AEAT, but on other files it can have different values and it's trying to figure out what the abbreviations mean.

 

[edwin_m]

I shared an office with the TRATIM guys for a couple of years around 1995, who were known as Train Performance Team which probably explains TPT, but I was never directly involved.

DM&EE was Director of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering - rather oddly all correspondence involving certain departments had to be to and from the relevant Director, and I was once formally admonished by memo from the Director of S&T Engineering for addressing my own memos to the minion that did the actual work, not the esteemed personage in person.

In one of numerous reorganisations (possibly part of "Organising for Quality" in the early 90s) some DM&EE functions were merged with BR Research to create Engineering Research and Development, so named to disguish it from Operational Research. The whole lot was privatised as AEA Technology in late 1996, but traded as BRR for some time afterwards, and ran it for a few years before shutting it down as unprofitable.

I think there was somebody with the initials REY in that team, so it may be that the other initials were the person doing that particular TRATIM run.

 

[Legolash2o]

Thanks edwin_m, I've updated my first post!

If I had to take an education guess. The first column is the department/team, whilst the 2nd column is person doing the 'run'. When you say ' TRATIM run', is that running a software simulation or a physical train do you know?

 

[The Planner]

Thanks edwin_m, I've updated my first post!

If I had to take an education guess. The first column is the department/team, whilst the 2nd column is person doing the 'run'. When you say ' TRATIM run', is that running a software simulation or a physical train do you know?

That will be software, it might well be VISION that they used, may be wrong though.

 

[Legolash2o]

That will be software, it might well be VISION that they used, may be wrong though.

Thanks for the info.

I ended up attaching one of the tratim files in the original post.

 

[edwin_m]

TRATIM was separate from VISION, it might have used the same algorithm but I think that's unlikely as VISION was developed by Research and TRATIM by DM&EE. I think it ran on some kind of mainframe or minicomputer.

 

[The Planner]

Thanks for the info.

I ended up attaching one of the tratim files in the original post.

Look like gradient profiles against distance?

 

[Legolash2o]

Look like gradient profiles against distance?

Yeah, there's files going all the way back from 1950s to 2000s. Gradients don't change that much though.

 

[edwin_m]

Yeah, there's files going all the way back from 1950s to 2000s. Gradients don't change that much though.

They had lots of gradient profiles in leather-bound volumes.

 

[Legolash2o]

Does anybody know what the / and second column (red box) represents please? Not sure if the 2nd column is just a new value.

 

[zwk500]

Does anybody know what the / and second column (red box) represents please? Not sure if the 2nd column is just a new value.

View attachment 94483

From the example file in your first post they look like they might be a separate line. If you post which route you're looking at somebody will be able to use the mileages to work out which line it refers to.

EDIT: If my theory is correct, the '/' refers to a mileage where the gradient does not change on the line concerned. The '/' is a standard symbol in timetables for passing through, so probably means something similar here.

 

[Legolash2o]

Hey, thanks for the responses.

The ELR is NFE at Selhurst Gloucester Road Jn.

The items starting with D are different than the columns and don't relate. I think those codes are potentially the technology or method used to calculate.

 

[zwk500]

Hey, thanks for the responses.

The ELR is NFE at Selhurst Gloucester Road Jn.

The items starting with D are different than the columns and don't relate. I think those codes are potentially the technology or method used to calculate.

D 8.84 = 8.84 indicates a mileage change (D for datum, I think). 8.84miles on route LBW (London Bridge to East Croydon) = 8.84 miles on route NFE (Norwood Junction to Epsom). On your example the values were miles and chains, but these can't be because there's only 80 chains in a mile so probably just a percentage calculation (84% of 1760yds). No idea what +M and IMP means.

The place where the second column begins is where the lines begin separating vertically for Norwood Fork Junction. I'm not 100% sure exactly which lines the data is for, but I'm fairly confident that the 1st column is for the Down Wallington as it descends less steeply than the Up line and rises to bridge the London Bridge Fasts at Norwood Fork Jn, and the 2nd column would be the up Wallington/Up London Bridge Slows., which stays more level. Both lines are falling because they need to go under the Victoria Slows from Selhurst.

EDIT: First Column is definitely the Down Wallington, although the distances are not quite right.

 

[Legolash2o]

D 8.84 = 8.84 indicates a mileage change (D for datum, I think). 8.84miles on route LBW (London Bridge to East Croydon) = 8.84 miles on route NFE (Norwood Junction to Epsom). On your example the values were miles and chains, but these can't be because there's only 80 chains in a mile so probably just a percentage calculation (84% of 1760yds). No idea what +M and IMP means.

The place where the second column begins is where the lines begin separating vertically for Norwood Fork Junction. I'm not 100% sure exactly which lines the data is for, but I'm fairly confident that the 1st column is for the Down Wallington as it descends less steeply than the Up line and rises to bridge the London Bridge Fasts at Norwood Fork Jn, and the 2nd column would be the up Wallington/Up London Bridge Slows., which stays more level. Both lines are falling because they need to go under the Victoria Slows from Selhurst.

Thanks for the info. The + means going up in distance from the origin. Going in the reverse direction has -. The value after the +- can be M (Metres), K(Kilometres) or MY (MilesYards I think).

 

[zwk500]

Thanks for the info. The + means going up in distance from the origin. Going in the reverse direction has -. The value after the +- can be M, K(Kilometres) or MY (MilesYards I think).

Makes sense. Does IMP change when K is used?

 

[Legolash2o]

This route doesn't have reverse data so either both tracks are parallel or the other column is as you suggested, the other track. Turns on the M is metres.



EDIT 1: After a search through all the file "+K". I've seen +K be used with PPM, PPH and IMP.

Thanks for posting the 5 mile diagram. One of the issues I've ran into when mapping the data is when the 5 mile diagrams and TRATIM don't match and it can be confusing to know which one to trust

EDIT 2: PPH and PPM are always +-K. IMP is mostly +-M but a small fraction of them is +-K.

 

[zwk500]

This route doesn't have reverse data so either both tracks are parallel or the other column is as you suggested, the other track.

More columns are more tracks, from the 2 examples you've shown

Turns on the M is metres.

That doesn't line up with the 2 examples shown, where M was Miles.Chains in post no 1 and Miles.something-near-Chains-but-not-quite in post 16.

EDIT 1: After a search through all the file "+K". I've seen +K be used with PPM, PPH and IMP.

OK, that blows my theory of IMP being imperial away. I can think of lots of things that would fit those acronyms but having absolutely no idea which is correct (if any) I won't post them and confuse you.

Thanks for posting the 5 mile diagram. One of the issues I've ran into when mapping the data is when the 5 mile diagrams and TRATIM don't match and it can be confusing to know which one to trust

The gradient in the 5 mile is taken from a scheme plan, which are drawn to scale and usually the most recent data available. The TRATIM data is from 1976. As a general rule, more recent data is more accurate as equipment and methods improve over time. There are A LOT of exceptions to this rule though.

 

[Legolash2o]

It seems like whenever there isn't a reverse route file specified, two columns are used. I've also seen a file that references a note about reverse so I suspect your theory about the 2nd column being the other track is correct.

Wish I knew which one to trust.

D 206.18 = 206.18 +M IMP SDI1

206.24 -802 -802 ---------------------
206.50 0 / 36 --/06/83 FOR
206.54 / 0
206.64 182 / 130 --/02/82 REV
206.71 644 / ---------------------
206.72 0 -100
206.79 / 0

Looking at London King's Cross to Finsbury Park, the line at 1.20 is where the flyover is and the gradient would suggest the '-43' (actually 43) is for the one that is very steep on the up slow - which matches cab videos on YouTube.

 

[Eloise]

Can on ask what on earth you are using them for?

Old school planning for sure, rarely use them these days and not sure many can read them. Stashes of them were saved when moving to MK in 2010 / 2012.

Last lot I recall receiving new were for Class 185s.

 

[Legolash2o]

I've mapped them on a geospatial network so that they can be used for algorithms, analytics or just view on a map.

They can be used to more accurately calculate emissions/energy requirements. A few people on LinkedIn have mentioned driver training and new stock as well.

My use is mostly around the maps and emissions stuff, as there's a difference between how much energy/fuel is required in various places in the UK. If a driver is required to stop in a loop, they'll be a difference if they are starting going up or down a hill initially.

You could also in theory take some any years' worth of schedules and identify the best places/routes to electrify based on the energy requirements and which ones could be alternative traction (for now). Not as simple as that but it never is when it comes to rail

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/geospatial-route-viewer.216269/

 

[zwk500]

I've mapped them on a geospatial network so that they can be used for algorithms, analytics or just view on a map.

They can be used to more accurately calculate emissions/energy requirements. A few people on LinkedIn have mentioned driver training and new stock as well.

Just to warn you, if you use it for a safety-critical purpose (such as driver training) the data needs to be 100% accurate and 100% up-to-date. Are you willing to maintain it to that standard, or are other willing to pay you to do so?

You've already expressed concern in this thread about the accuracy of the data and conflicting sources.

 

[The Planner]

Old school planning in 2010, where is the crying emoji.

 

[Legolash2o]

Just to warn you, if you use it for a safety-critical purpose (such as driver training) the data needs to be 100% accurate and 100% up-to-date. Are you willing to maintain it to that standard, or are other willing to pay you to do so?

You've already expressed concern in this thread about the accuracy of the data and conflicting sources.

Couldn't agree with you more!

It's just what people have said what's possible. I will just be using it for emissions related work. Other than that it can be used for curiosity, general research, test out theories, ideas, train simulator, discussions, etc. I will be adding a clause saying it shouldn't be used for a safety-critical setting, I'm not liable for any mistakes, use at own risk, etc.

I've already been asked if someone can use the data commercially (not driver training), but I still had to decline as it would need to be least 99% accurate (for the reasons you stated). On a similar note, there's quite a few data sources within Network Rail that can contract each other and yet are still used today.

I will be doing a second pass to validate the data and also add some automated validation as well - to find discrepancies. Luckily, for a large large majority of the data... TRATIM and 5 mile diagrams match exactly. It's complex stations and grade separated junctions where things start to get tricky.

By the way, I forgot to say thanks for the help figuring out parts of the TRATIM files, really appreciated it! As a thanks to you and the forum, I will hopefully, this weekend, share an interactive gradient map (similar to the electrification one I already shared).

 

[zwk500]

On a similar note, there's quite a few data sources within Network Rail that can contract each other and yet are still used today.

NR are well aware, the issue is the only way to establish the correct data is to send staff out and measure it.

By the way, I forgot to say thanks for the help figuring out parts of the TRATIM files, really appreciated it! As a thanks to you and the forum, I will hopefully, this weekend, share an interactive gradient map (similar to the electrification one I already shared).

Not at all. It will be interesting to see an interactive gradient and electrification map - NR did start working with somebody who was putting together an interactive gauge map for his PhD, never found out what happened to that after COVID.

 

[Legolash2o]

NR did start working with somebody who was putting together an interactive gauge map for his PhD, never found out what happened to that after COVID.

That's me

 

[The Planner]

That's me

You're not at Hull Uni are you? NR+?

 

[zwk500]

That's me

If you're the chap from Hull uni, we've spent an afternoon sitting together.

 

[Legolash2o]

You're not at Hull Uni are you? NR+?

Yep, the very same. I no longer work on NR+ as I left, but I do join in a few meetings to advise. I now focus on my studies and also continue working on the work I was doing before NR+.

If you're the chap from Hull uni, we've spent an afternoon sitting together.

Now I'm curious to know who you are!

If either of you want a login to see the maps, just send me your email via a PM and I'll create an account for you.

Just an update. Below is the gradients map that I managed to finish.

https://railmap.azurewebsites.net/Public/GradientsMap