Dynamic VehiclerT-ack Interaction of European Standard ...12382/FULLTEXT01.pdf · Dynamic...

Doctoral Thesis

TRITA AVE 2007:36

ISSN 1651-7660

ISBN 978-91-7178-727-9

Dynamic Vehicle-Track Interaction of

European Standard Freight Wagons

with Link Suspension

by

Per-Anders Jönsson

Postal Address

Royal Institute of Technology

Aeronautical and Vehicle Engineering

Rail Vehicles

SE-100 44 Stockholm

Visiting address

Teknikringen 8

Stockholm

Telephone

+46 8 790 84 76

Fax

+46 8 790 76 29

E-mail

[email protected]

Doctoral Thesis in Railway TechnologyISSN 1651-7660

TRITA AVE 2007:36

PER-ANDERS JÖNSSONDynamic Vehicle-Track Interaction of

European Standard Freight Wagons with Link Suspension

ISBN 978-91-7178-727-9

© PER-ANDERS JÖNSSON, 2007

Academic thesis, which with the approval of the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), will be presented for public review in fulfilment

of the requirements for a Degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Royal Institute of TechnologySchool of Engineering Sciences

Department of Aeronautical and Vehicle EngineeringDivision of Rail Vehicles

SE-100 44 StockholmSweden

Phone +46 8 790 6000www.kth.se

Dynamic Vehicle-Track Interaction of European Standard Freight Wagonswith Link Suspension

i

Contents

Preface and acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

Outline of Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

Contribution of Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2 European Freight Wagon Running Gear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.2 Single-axle running gear with link suspension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52.3 Link suspension bogie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62.4 Y25 bogie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3 Running Behaviour of European Standard Freight Wagons . . . . . . . . . . 93.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93.2 Behaviour on tangent track . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93.3 Behaviour in curves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133.4 Influence on track deterioration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

4 The Present Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174.2 Link suspension characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174.3 Multibody dynamic simulation model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194.4 Improved ride comfort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214.5 Influence on track deterioration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

5 Conclusions and Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235.1 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235.2 Future work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27


iii

Preface and acknowledgements

The work reported in this doctoral thesis has been carried out as part of a researchprogramme on vehicle-track interaction (called SAMBA) at the Royal Institute ofTechnology (KTH), Division of Rail Vehicles. The aim of the present work is toinvestigate the dynamic performance of freight wagons.

The financial and personal support from the Swedish National Rail Administration(Banverket), Bombardier Transportation (Sweden), Green Cargo and InterfleetTechnology (Sweden) is gratefully acknowledged.

For the on-track tests additional support was received from Green Cargo, InterfleetTechnology, Kockums Industrier, Dellner Dampers and Tikab Strukturmekanik.

The support from Mr. Ingemar Persson at DEsolver regarding the multibody simulationsoftware GENSYS is also gratefully acknowledged.

Thanks to Mr. Per-Erik Olsson for providing documents and background information ondevelopment of the standard running gear in ORE´s B37 group.

Special thanks to Mr. Kent Lindgren and Mr. Danilo Prelevic at the Marcus WallenbergLaboratory for their valuable contribution to the laboratory tests.

Finally, I would like to thank my colleagues at the division, in particular my supervisorsDr.-Ing. Sebastian Stichel and Prof. Evert Andersson as well as Prof. Mats Berg.

Stockholm, June 2007

Per-Anders Jönsson


v

Abstract

The link suspension is the most prevailing suspension system for freight wagons inCentral and Western Europe. The system design is simple and has existed for more than100 years. However, still its characteristics are not fully understood. This thesisinvestigates the dynamic performance of freight wagons and comprises five parts:

In the first part a review of freight wagon running gear is made. The different suspensionsystems are described and their advantages and disadvantages are discussed.

The second part focuses on the lateral force-displacement characteristics of the linksuspension. Results from stationary measurements on freight wagons and laboratorytests of the link suspension characteristics are presented. To improve the understandingof various mechanisms and phenomena in link suspension systems, a simulation model isdeveloped.

In the third part the multibody dynamic simulation model is discussed. The previousfreight wagon model developed at KTH is able to explain many of the phenomenaobserved in tests. In some cases, however, simulated and measured running behaviourdiffer. Therefore, a new simulation model is presented and validated against on-track testresults. The performance of standard two-axle freight wagons is investigated. The mostimportant parameters for the running behaviour of the vehicle are the suspensioncharacteristics. The variation in characteristics between different wagons is large due togeometrical tolerances of the components, wear, corrosion, moisture or other lubrication.The influence of the variation in suspension characteristics and other parameters on thebehaviour of the wagon, on tangent track and in curves, is discussed. Finally, suggestionsfor improvements of the system are made.

A majority of the traffic related track deterioration cost originates from freight traffic.With heavier and faster freight trains the maintenance cost is likely to increase. In thefourth part the possibility to improve ride comfort and reduce track forces on standardfreight wagons with link suspension is discussed. The variation of characteristics in linksuspension running gear is considerable and unfavourable conditions leading to huntingare likely to occur. Supported by on-track tests and multibody dynamic simulations, it isconcluded that the running behaviour of two-axled wagons with UIC double-linksuspension as well as wagons with link suspension bogies (G-type) can be improvedwhen the running gear are equipped with supplementary hydraulic dampers.

Finally in the fifth part the effects of different types of running gear and operationalconditions on the track deterioration marginal cost — in terms of settlement in theballast, component fatigue, wear and RCF — is investigated. Considerable differences intrack deterioration cost per produced ton-km for the different types of running gear areobserved. Axle load is an important parameter for settlement and component fatigue.Also the height of centre of gravity has significant influence on track deterioration,especially on track sections with high cant deficiency or cant excess.

Keywords: railway; freight wagon; running gear; link suspension; laboratory test;stiffness; dry friction; hysteresis; simulation; vehicle-track interaction; multibodysimulation; MBS.


vii

Outline of Thesis

The scope of this thesis is the dynamic vehicle-track interaction of European standardfreight wagons with link suspension. The thesis includes an introduction, a researchreview, a summary, and the following appended papers:

A Jönsson P-A., Andersson E. and Stichel S.: Experimental and Theoretical Analysisof Freight Wagon Link Suspension. Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, Proc. ofIMechE, Part F, Vol 220, No. F4, London 2006, p 361-372.

B Jönsson P-A., Andersson E. and Stichel S.: Influence of link suspension variationon two-axle freight wagon dynamics. Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. 44,Supplement, 2006, p 415-423.

C Jönsson P-A.: Multibody simulation model for freight wagons with UIC linksuspension, TRITA AVE 2006:102, KTH Rail Vehicles, Stockholm, 2006.

D Jönsson P-A., Stichel S. and Persson I.: New Simulation Model for Freight Wagons

with UIC Link Suspension. Accepted for presentation at the 20th IAVSDSymposium, Berkeley, California, August 13-17, 2007. To be published inconference proceedings.

E Jönsson P-A., Stichel S. and Andersson E.: Improving Ride Comfort in FreightWagons with Link Suspension Running Gear using Hydraulic Dampers. Presentedat the 37. Tagung Moderne Schienenfahrzeuge, Graz, April 16-18, 2007. To be published in ZEV Glasers Annalen Tagungsband, SFT Graz 2007.

F Jönsson P-A. and Stichel S.: On the Influence of Freight Traffic OperationalConditions on Track Deterioration Cost, Accepted for presentation at theInternational Heavy Haul Conference, June 11-13, Kiruna, Sweden, 2007. To bepublished in conference proceedings.

For all papers Jönsson has carried out the calculations, analysed the results and writtenthe manuscript. The analyses and manuscripts have been discussed and reviewed byAndersson, Stichel respectively Persson. The experimental analysis of link suspensioncomponents in paper A was carried out by Jönsson. The data recording for the on-tracktests in papers C, D and E was performed by Interfleet Technology AB. The on-track testwas supervised by Andersson and Jönsson.


ix

Contribution of Thesis

This thesis has improved the understanding of the link suspension system used inEuropean railway freight wagons. Several features and phenomena, in the dynamicbehaviour of freight wagons with lateral link suspensions, have been found and studiedthrough laboratory tests, multibody dynamic simulations and on-track tests. Some of thefeatures and phenomena are well known from earlier investigations, while others appearto be fairly unknown, or at least not made public. Suggestions for improvement of thedynamic performance of freight wagons are made as well.

The thesis is believed to make the following contributions to the present research field:

- A comprehensive literature review covering various freight wagon running geardesigns is published.

- A new simulation model that improves the predictability for multibody dynamicsimulations of freight wagons with link suspensions is proposed.

- The simulation results are validated against on-track test results.

- The variation in lateral respectively longitudinal suspension characteristics isquantified.

- It is shown that the risk of wheelset hunting is restricting the possibility to increasespeed for empty two-axled freight wagons.

- It is found that for standard freight wagon running gear ride comfort can beimproved and track forces reduced by means of supplementary hydraulic dampers.

- The influence of different types of running gear and operational conditions on themarginal track deterioration cost is investigated.

- The actual contact geometry of the links and end bearings is found to deviate considerably from the nominal geometry. This is the case for new components – due to geometrical tolerances – and for components worn in service. These deviations have a significant influence on the suspension characteristics.

- The influence of elastic deformation in the contact surfaces of links end bearings ispointed out to be essential for the system characteristics.

- Further more are flexibilities in the suspension components as well as in the con-necting structures found to a have considerable effect on the suspension characteristics.

- Generally, considerable variations in the hysteresis loops are shown to appear fordifferent sets of suspension components.


1

1 INTRODUCTION

The railway system is complex. The dynamic response of a freight wagon stronglydepends on the interaction between vehicle and track respectively vehicle and thetransported goods. Main requirements for the technology used in freight transportsystems are safety and cost efficiency. Due to the complexity with various conditions indifferent countries an introduction of new types of running gear or enhancement inoperational conditions, i.e. increased axleload and speed, has to be made with greatcaution. The running gear on freight wagons used in international traffic have greatuniformity. Three different principles, shown in Figure 1, are mainly used.

• Y25 bogie.

• Link suspension bogie (G-type).

• Two-axle wagons with UIC double link suspension.

Wagons with these types of running gear exist in large numbers and will continue to bethe backbone of the European rail freight transport system for a foreseeable future.

Figure 1: Standard types of running gear.

The transportation effort on rail in Sweden has remained relatively constant since thebeginning of the 1970s. During the same period has the road transportation effortincreased considerably, cf. Figure 2. In Europe the loss of market share is even greater.Hence, improving ride quality and increase axleload, loading gauge and speed aredesirable in order to make rail freight traffic more competitive [26] and [52].

However, a majority of the traffic related cost for track deterioration originates fromfreight traffic. As heavier and faster freight trains are introduced the cost for trackmaintenance is likely to increase, at least if freight wagons with standard running gearare used and the track is not strengthened.

UIC double-link suspensionLink suspension bogie (G-type)

Y25 bogie

Section 1 - Introduction

2

Figure 2: Freight transport effort in Sweden and comparison of market share in Sweden, USA and Europe [52].


3

2 EUROPEAN FREIGHT WAGON RUNNING GEAR

2.1 Introduction

Early efforts were made to standardize European freight wagons. In 1947 the EuropeanEconomic Commission gave the International Union of Railways (UIC) the initiativeand they defined a European standardization programme with the following aims:

- Interchangeability of the most frequently required freight wagoncomponents.

- Assimilation of some principle freight wagon data, in particular measures relatedto loading capacity of the wagons.

- Complete standardisation of freight wagons.

The European running gear designs for freight wagons in international traffic, and tolarge extent national operations as well, were given their main running characteristicsduring the 1950s and 1960s. Requirements for increased maximum operational speed inthe forceable future, i.e. 30-40 years, were considered when the running characteristicswere set [56].

Today freight wagons in Europe run typically at maximum 100 km/h with a maximumaxle load of 22.5 tonnes. In Sweden a whole network for freight traffic with an increasedloading gauge and 25 tonnes axle load (for some lines 30 tonnes or more) is built. Thelargest rail freight company, Green Cargo AB, is also running overnight mail servicewith specially equipped two-axle freight wagons at 160 km/h at a maximum axle load of20 tonnes. Similar mail traffic exists in Germany and France.

Outside central and western Europe the so called three-piece bogie is the prevailingrunning gear design for freight wagons. Different variations of the three-piece designexist, for example the inter-axle linkage designs of Scheffel and List. Reviews of variousthree-piece bogie designs are given in [21] and [68]. More information on the three-piecebogies is given in [10], [22], [33], [36], [41], [45], [46], [48], [62], [67], [69] and [72]. Adetailed review of freight wagon running gear in general is presented in a separate reportby the author [29].

Since the middle of the 1990s several novel designs of freight wagon running gear areused in Europe. Most of these designs are, up to now, used in national freight operationsonly. These and traditional European designs are listed in Table 2-1. Reference toliterature for further information is given. Traditionally friction damping is used onfreight wagons. However, on some of the new running gear designs hydraulic dampersare used.

A short description of the double-link suspension, link bogie and Y25 bogie is given inSections 2.2 - 2.4.

Section 2 - European Freight Wagon Running Gear

4

Table 2-1 Running gear for freight wagons in Europe [29].

The wheel-rail interface is important for the dynamic interaction between vehicle andtrack. In Europe there are different approaches on how the interface should be managed.Wheel and rail profiles and rail inclination differs from country to country, e.g.,

• 1 in 20 rail inclination - UK, France, Italy, Norway,

• 1 in 40 rail inclination - Germany, Austria, Switzerland,

• 1 in 30 rail inclination - Sweden.

For freight wagons in international traffic it is important that they are designed toperform well for all variable wheel-rail contact conditions that can occur. Due to wear

Running gear Reference TypePrimary damping

Double-link suspension [4], [23], [34], [35], [39], [44], [50], [74], [75]

Single-axle running gear Friction

Link suspension bogie [23], [43], [50], [73], [78]

Bogie Friction

Y25 [16], [18], [25], [28], [43], [47], [50], [53], [73]

Bogie Friction

Axle motion bogie [1], [7] Bogie Friction

DRRS bogie [51] Bogie Friction

Niesky link [13], [14] Single-axle running gear Friction

S2000 [13], [14] Single-axle running gear Friction

TF25 [15], [20], [68], [71]

Bogie Hydraulic

TF25SA [63], [82] Single-axle running gear Hydraulic

Unitruck [1], [42] Single-axle running gear Friction

Y37 bogie [3], [12], [49], [51]

Bogie Friction

Gigabox [38] Bogie Hydraulic/Rubber

SCTE Barber Easy Ride [70] Bogie Friction

ELH Opti-Track [70] Bogie Friction

LEILA bogie [24], [26] Bogie Hydraulic/Rubber


5

and maintenance operations the variation in contact conditions can be even greater. Theequivalent conicity is often used to characterise the wheel-rail interface. In Figure 3 acomparison between the S1002 and P8 wheel profiles on rails with 1 in 20 respectively 1in 40 inclination as well as the effect of variation in track gauge is shown. The equivalentconicity for the S1002 wheel profile on rails with 1 in 20 inclination can be low and cancause bad ride comfort for freight wagons. Contact geometry also determines the size ofthe contact patch and in turn the contact stresses which also are important for cost andsafety of rail freight traffic.

Figure 3: Wheel-rail contact conditions. Comparison between S1002 and P8 wheel profiles on UIC60 rail profiles with various inclination.

2.2 Single-axle running gear with link suspension

Freight wagons with link suspensions have existed for more than 100 years. The linksuspension, shown in Figure 4, is the most common suspension type for freight wagonsin Europe today. Already in 1890 the principle of link suspension was defined as astandard on two-axle freight wagons [23]. The present design originates from the early1950s. The parabolic leaf spring was introduced as a standard component and thepermissible axle load was increased to 22.5 tonnes in the 1980s [44], [50].

The vehicle body is connected by double links to the parabolic or trapezoidal leaf springthat rests on the axle box. This arrangement allows the axle box to move in both thelongitudinal and the lateral direction relative to the carbody [13], [14] and [23].

The suspension is quite simple and robust and also occupies a modest amount of spacelaterally and vertically. Stiffness and damping are both provided by one system and areintended to be proportional to the vertical load on the axle box. This type of running gear

Equivalent conicity (UIC519)P8 wheel profile / UIC60 rail profile

0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0 5 10

Lateral amplitude [mm]

λe

1 / 20 - 1437

1 / 40 - 1433

1 / 30 - 1437


0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0 5 10


λe

1 / 20 - 1435

1 / 40 - 1435

1 / 30 - 1435

Equivalent conicity (UIC519)S1002 wheel profile / UIC60 rail profile

0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0 5 10


λe

1 / 20 - 1435

1 / 40 - 1435

1 / 30 - 1435


0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0 5 10


λe

1 / 20 - 1437

1 / 40 - 1433

1 / 30 - 1437


0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0 5 10


λe

1 / 20 - 1437

1 / 40 - 1433

1 / 30 - 1437


0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0 5 10


λe

1 / 20 - 1435

1 / 40 - 1435

1 / 30 - 1435


0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0 5 10


λe

1 / 20 - 1435

1 / 40 - 1435

1 / 30 - 1435


0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0 5 10


λe

1 / 20 - 1437

1 / 40 - 1433

1 / 30 - 1437


6

is also quite light, which allows a maximum of payload in the wagon. It is also quiteinexpensive. The lateral and the longitudinal play is approximately ±20 mm [44].

Figure 4: Single-axle running gear with UIC double-link suspension.

2.3 Link suspension bogie

The link suspension principle has been used on freight wagon bogies since about 1925.The bogie Type 931 was developed in the 1950s and had an axle distance of 2000 mmand wheel diameters of 1000 mm. The link suspension bogie, also known as the G bogie,was the first bogie to be standardized by UIC. The UIC standard for freight bogies wasrevised in 1966 to prepare for the introduction of automatic couplers. The new linksuspension bogie design, known as the Talbot bogie and in Sweden also G66, has an axledistance of 1800 mm and 920 mm wheel diameters. Finally improvements in the designwere made and the G70 type, and later on the G762, was introduced [43], [50]. Thecommonly used type G70 is shown in Figure 5. The lateral play is ±23 mm and thelongitudinal play is ±6 mm [44].

Figure 5: Link suspension bogie (G70).

a) Double-link suspension.

Leaf spring

End bearings Links

b) Double-link assembly. c) Components.


7

2.4 Y25 bogie

In 1960 the French National Railways (SNCF) started to develop a new type of freightwagon bogie. The bogie should be lighter and occupy less space than the standard bogieof those days, the link bogie Type 931 described in Section 2.3. The bogie known as Y21was designed to be interchangeable with the Type 931 bogie. The Y21 bogie had an axledistance of 2000 mm and used wheels with a diameter of 920 mm. Due to the use of coilsprings instead of leaf springs the bogie frame could be made shorter and lighter, [43][47].

When the standard for freight wagon bogies were revised in 1966 the design waschanged and the Y25 bogie was born. The Y25 bogie, shown in Figure 6, has an axledistance of 1800 mm and 920 mm wheel diameters.

The suspension of the Y25 bogie consists of coil springs and friction dampers. Thevertical load that is carried by the outer coil springs located towards the bogie centre, istransmitted through the inclined Lenoir links connecting the bogie frame with the springholders. The resulting longitudinal force on the spring holders depends on the verticalaxle box load and is transmitted to the axle boxes by pushers. Thus friction forces,approximately proportional to the vertical load, are created in the friction surfacesbetween the axle boxes and the bogie frame via the pushers. As a result lateral andvertical motions are damped, [28], [43] and [53].

Figure 6: Y25 bogie [28].

The shorter bogie frame together with the use of coil springs instead of leaf springsmakes the Y25 bogie slightly lighter than the link suspension bogie. The lateral play of±10 mm between the wheelsets and the bogie frame is less than half of the play for thelink suspension bogie and the Y25 bogie therefore permits the wagon to have a

c) Sideview.

Spring holder

Lenoir link

Outer spring

Inner spring

4 mm clearance

Pusher

a) Lenoir link. b) Damping.


8

somewhat wider carbody. The longitudinal play is 4 mm [28]. However, the curvingperformance is poorer than for the link suspension bogie [75].


9

3 RUNNING BEHAVIOUR OF EUROPEAN STANDARD FREIGHT WAGONS

3.1 Introduction

The European standard running gear were, as discussed in Chapter 2, mainly developedduring the 1950s and the 1960s. Traditionally the dynamic performance was investigatedtrough on-track tests [56]. Due to the complex suspension characteristics analyticanalyses were restricted to linearized models. During recent years, however, non-linearsimulation models of standard freight wagon running gear are developed. In Section 3.2and 3.3 some of these models are reviewed. Due to the wheel-rail contact forces the trackwill deteriorate. The major mechanisms that cause cost for track deterioration are:

• Track geometry degradation.

• Fatigue in components.

• Wear of the rails.

• Rolling contact fatigue, RCF.

Models for track deterioration are reviewed in Section 3.4.

Analysing the running behaviour of freight wagons is complex due to the large variationswithin the system. Stichel [76] pointed out the following three topics to be of specialinterest regarding the running behaviour of freight wagons with standard running gear:

• High vertical wheel-rail forces which might cause serious track deterioration.

• Non-satisfactory curving performance with high creep-forces, causing wear and fatigue problems.

• Suddenly arising violent hunting motions, sometimes at speeds far below the max-imum operating speed.

3.2 Behaviour on tangent track

Railway vehicles are so called parameter dependent systems. A typical parameter is thevehicle speed v and the equilibrium solution to the system depends on the value of theparameter. As the system is non-linear several equilibrium solutions can exist for thesame set of parameters. Hence, the equilibrium solution does not only depend on theparameters but initial conditions as well. Non-linear mechanics and its application to railvehicle system dynamics is discussed by several authors, c.f. True [84]-[85], Stichel [80]and Polach [66]. A principle bifurcation diagram for a rail vehicle is shown in Figure 7.For speeds below vnlin, the so called non-linear critical speed, only the equilibriumsolution exists and any oscillations are damped out. However, if the speed is between vcrand vlin two stable attractors separated by an unstable branch exist. Here the response ofthe system depends on the initial conditions. If the initial conditions are above theunstable branch the equilibrium solution is given by the non-zero attractor. For speedsabove vlin the limit cycle is always reached regardless of the excitation amplitude.

Section 3 - Running Behaviour of European Standard Freight Wagons

10

Figure 7: Principle bifurcation diagram for a railway vehicle [66].

Link suspension characteristics

The most important parameters for the running behaviour of the vehicle are thesuspension characteristics. Lange developed a model for the horizontal suspensioncharacteristics based on a geometrical representation of the components in thesuspension [39] and [40].

Piotrowski investigated the lateral and longitudinal suspension characteristics [65]. Hepresented detailed models realised by a number of pivoted pendulums composinglinkages. The detailed models were simplified to systems of dry-friction sliders andlinear springs that reproduce the suspension characteristics.

The characteristics with worn suspension elements with non-cylindrical shape isinvestigated by Grzelak and Piotrowski [19]. They conclude that the geometry of thecomponents in contact strongly influences the characteristics.

Y25 bogie

Several authors have investigated the running performance of the Y25 bogie [8], [16],[25], [28], [53] and [77]. Evans and Rogers compared simulated and measured runningbehaviour for an empty freight wagon with Y25 bogie [16]. They concluded thatmodelling of the secondary yaw suspension is particularly important. The longitudinalplay in the sidebearers have significant influence on the running behaviour for the emptyvehicle. The overall conclusion is that the simulation model predict the runningbehaviour well.

Stichel compared on-track test results with simulation results for an empty respectivelyloaded wagon [77]. He also concludes that the Y25 simulation model can represent mostphenomena found in on-track tests.

Link suspension bogie

Stiepel and Zeipel analysed the performance of a freight wagon with link suspensionbogie [81]. They measured suspension characteristics in a laboratory testrig and used themeasure hysteresis loops in the simulation model.


11

A comparison between measured quantities and simulated behaviour is performed byStichel [77] and [78]. He concludes that in many cases the measured and simulatedbehaviour of a freight wagon with link suspension bogies agree quite well. However, insome cases there are discrepancies that motivate further studies with more advancedsimulation models.

Two-axle wagon with link suspension.

Hoffmann studied in his thesis the fundamental dynamic behaviour of two-axle freightwagons [27]. Special attention was paid to the formulation and numerical integration ofthe non-smooth problem. A bifurcation diagram for an empty two-axle freight wagon isshown in Figure 8. The diagram shows that the two-axle freight wagon has twoprincipally different hunting modes, wheelset hunting and carbody hunting. At wheelsethunting the wheelsets move laterally from flange to flange. The wheelset hunting modehas a frequency in the range 4-8 Hz and is present at higher speeds. The frequency forthe carbody hunting mode is lower, generally between 1.5 and 3 Hz.

Figure 8: Bifurcation diagram for an empty two-axle freight wagon [27]. S1002 wheel profile and UIC60 rail profile with 1:30 inclination.

Lange developed a simulation model for two-axle freight wagons with link suspensions[39] and [40]. He also introduced a model for the horizontal suspension characteristicsbased on a geometrical representation of the components in the suspension.

A comparison between measured quantities and simulated behaviour is performed byStichel in [74] and [77]. He concludes as well for two-axle wagons with link suspensionsthat in many cases the measured and simulated behaviour agree quite well. However, insome cases there are discrepancies that have to be studied further.

In the early work of Stichel [76], the following aspects are set up for furtherinvestigations:

• The characteristics and change of characteristics of the link suspension with time. Perhaps also the modelling of the link suspension has to be improved.

• Realistic flexible eigenmodes of the carbody determined with help of FE-models have to be incorporated in the simulation models to investigate their influence on the running behaviour.


12

• The nonlinear behaviour of the vehicles with dramatic changes of the vehicle response due to minimal changes in the input data has to be studied further, to get a better impression on how important this might be for the general running behav-iour.

The importance of considering the structural flexibility of the carbody when analysingtwo-axle freight wagons is shown in [79]. Eigenmodes of the carbody underframe arecalculated with finite element analysis. The lowest eigenmodes are shown in Figure 9.The first torsional eigenmode is for the loaded wagon 2.5 Hz and the four firsteigenmodes are all below 10 Hz.

Figure 9: Four first free eigenmodes for a loaded underframe [79]. 20.5 tonnes axleload. Frequencies for the empty vehicle is shown in parentheses.

The sensitivity in the response to small parameter variations at typical operational speedsis analysed by Stichel [80]. The reason for the observed behaviour is the co-existence oftwo stable attractors, in principle shown in Figure 7, for a relatively wide speed range.Large single track irregularities can change the behaviour from a violent hunting motionto just a reaction to track irregularities or the other way around.

The influence of high vertical track forces on track geometry degradation is investigatedby Stichel [75]. He concludes that further research on this topic is important because the


13

cost for track maintenance is considerable and that a large amount of the cost originatesfrom freight traffic. Further more wear and fatigue in curves are probably not a majorissue on most main lines in Europe, because the average curve radius is large. In somecountries, however, with a considerable amount of small radii curves, the curvingperformance of freight wagons is not negligible.

3.3 Behaviour in curves

Specht calculated the material loss on the wheels for three types of freight wagonrunning gear, the Y25 bogie, the link suspension bogie (DB665) and the three-piecebogie with inter-axle linkage by Sheffel (SATS) [73]. The contact patch is discretizedand energy dissipation is calculated for different running conditions. Then the materialloss off the wheels is determined. The relation between energy dissipation and materialloss is determined trough roller rig tests. In Figure 10 is the material loss after 10000 kmon a typical railway network shown. The curve radii distribution used in this comparisonis:

Radius PercentageTangent 60 %2000 m 14 %750 m 11 %500 m 10 %300 m 5 %

The difference between the Y25 bogie and the link suspension bogie (DB665) isconsiderable. Block breaking influences the tread wear and the effect on the total wornoff volume is relatively larger for running gear with soft wheelset guidance due to theirbetter curving performance. For rails, however, only the curving performancecontributes. Hence, here the difference between the different running gear is greater.

Stichel compared the quasistatic curving performance for the Y25 bogie, link suspensionbogie and two-axle wagons with link suspensions [75]. The energy dissipation and angleof attack as function of curve radius is shown in Figure 11. The wagon with linksuspension bogie steers almost perfect down to a curve radius of about 300 metres whilethe Y25 bogie steers radially down to a curve radius of 600 metre. On a railway networkwith many sharp curves this difference might not be intelligible.


14

Figure 10: Material loss on wheels. Contribution from breaking respectively wheel-rail contact on a typical railway network after 10000 km [73].

Figure 11: Yaw angle (angle of attack) of first wheelset and energy dissipation of first outer wheel for different curve radii [75].


15

Also the dynamic curving can be critical. Hunting can cause high track forces, especiallywhen the lateral bump stops come in contact [74] and [78].

Pascal investigated the cause for derailments of UIC standard freight wagons Litt: G69,i.e. closed two-axle freight wagons with 5.7 meter distance between the wheelsets. Boththeoretical and experimental work was performed. He concluded that the reason for thederailments were a combination of vehicle and track parameters. With new suspensioncomponents, i.e. low amount of hysteresis in the lateral suspension and a lateralamplitude of the wheelset of more than 15 mm the conditions can become hazardous. Healso found that the system can be sensitive to initial conditions. In fact it was impossibleto reproduce the same signal twice during on-track tests.

3.4 Influence on track deterioration

Increasing axleload, loading gauge and speed is desirable for rail freight operators inorder to improve their competitiveness. However, by doing so the cost for maintainingthe track is likely to increase. At least if not the running performance of the freightwagons are improved or the track strengthened. Hence, understanding the vehicle-trackinteraction is important in order to epitomize the rail transport system. Numerous modelshave been developed in order to analyse various aspects of track deterioration. A goodoverview of existing models is given by Öberg [92]. A few of these models are reviewedin this section.

During the 1980s ORE investigated the effect of increased axleload on cost for trackmaintenance. Tests were performed to study the effect of an increased permissibleaxleload from 20 to 22.5 tonnes. The proposed model couples traffic volume and trackforces to track geometry degradation and component fatigue.

Based on research in the UK the Rail Surface Damage model is proposed [9]. This modelconsiders the tangential forces in the contact patch and their influence on wear androlling contact fatigue (RCF). The product between creep force and creepage, the so-called wearnumber, is calculated. Trough damage identification and multibodysimulations of the most common vehicles on the railway network the wear number iscoupled to the size of damage on the track. For small wear numbers RCF is thedominating mechanism. As the wear number increases, wear becomes more prominent.

On the Swedish rail network the cost for track maintenance is mainly given by the fourcomponents:

• track geometry degradation,

• component fatigue,

• wear of the rails,

• rolling contact fatigue.

Öberg proposed a model mainly based on the ORE model and the Rail Surface Damagemodel. The model considers the cost caused by each of the four deteriorationmechanisms and is calibrated against the cost for maintenance on the Swedish railwaynetwork. Hence, the model give a basis to evaluate different types of running gear andtheir effect on the cost for track maintenance. This model is choose for the studypresented in Paper F.


16


17

4 THE PRESENT WORK

4.1 Introduction

In Chapter 3 the present knowledge in the research field was reviewed. Despite severalstudies on the area there is a need to better understand the behaviour of link suspensionrunning gears and several questions are still to be answered, for instance:

• Is it possible to improve the predictability for multibody dynamic simulations?

• What are the variations in link suspension characteristics?

• How does the variation influence the dynamic performance of freight wagons.

• What are the limitations with the suspension system with regard to increased speed, axleload and loading gauge?

• Is it possible to improve the system?

• What are the influence of the dynamic performance on the track deterioration?

The link suspension characteristics is mainly discussed in Paper A, but to some extentalso in Papers C and D.

The multibody dynamic simulation model is covered in Papers B-D. Paper D is basicallya summary of Paper C.

The possibility to improve the dynamic performance is discussed in Paper E.Suggestions of general improvements to the system are given in Papers C and D.

The dynamic performance of the link suspension running gears is compared with theY25 bogie in Paper F and the influence on track deterioration is discussed.

In Sections 4.2-4.5 the general content of the appended Papers A-F is summarized.Conclusions are presented in Chapter 5.

4.2 Link suspension characteristics

The most important parameters for the running behaviour of a vehicle are the suspensioncharacteristics. Characteristics of the link suspension is therefore investigated throughexperimental and theoretical analysis of suspension components respectivelymeasurements of lateral and longitudinal suspension characteristics of several freightwagons with link suspension. Suspension characteristics measurements from othersources are gathered as well.

In the experimental and theoretical part in Paper A, the influence of load, displacementamplitude, frequency and maintenance status of the components on the suspensioncharacteristics is investigated. The experiment is not primary setup to measure force-displacement characteristics in a complete primary suspension as they are configured ona wagon. Rather the principal behaviour of the link suspension, in particular the contactbetween link and end bearing, is studied.

A principle hysteresis loop is shown in Figure 12. In Table 1 typical values for lateral andlongitudinal characteristics are defined. Case 1, 3 and 5 respectively refer to min,average and maximum hysteresis loops found in measurements on wagons. Thehysteresis loops are in principle changed according to Figure 13 as the suspension

Section 4 - The Present Work

18

components are worn. Hence, in lateral direction the hysteresis increases andlongitudinally the hysteresis decreases.

Figure 12: Principle force-displacement characteristics.

Figure 13: Change in lateral respectively longitudinal characteristics due to wear of suspension components.

Fd k1

k2

F

y

yi

Fi

Ks

Fx

x

New

Worn

Fy

y

Worn

New

Longitudinal Lateral

Fx

x

New

Worn

Fy

y

Worn

New

Longitudinal Lateral


19

Table 1: Typical longitudinal and lateral suspension characteristics for 2-axle freight wagons with link suspension. Stiffness and force are defined in Figure 12. The values are normalized with the vertical axle box load.

4.3 Multibody dynamic simulation model

The previous freight wagon model developed at KTH is able to explain many of thephenomena observed in tests. In some cases, however, simulated and measured runningbehaviour differ. Therefore, a new simulation model, shown in Figure 14, is presented.Simulation results and on-track test results agree well. Hence, the model representsreality quite well.

The longitudinal dimension of the leafspring is considered by attaching the lateralelements between carbody and leafspring a distance aal from axle centre. A frictioncoupling connects the wheelset and leafspring in yaw. This was not considered in theprevious model and the difference in running behaviour between the two models isconsiderable.

Figure 14: Coupling between the wheelset and carbody in the horizontal plane.

kxi kyi

Case ik1/Fbox

[1/m]k2/Fbox

[1/m]Fd/Fbox

[1]k1/Fbox

[1/m]k2/Fbox

[1/m]Fd/Fbox

[1]

1 7.0 6.0 0.04 20.0 3.0 0.08

2 10.0 6.0 0.05 27.0 3.0 0.09

3 20.0 6.0 0.06 35.0 3.0 0.10

4 30.0 6.0 0.08 45.0 3.0 0.10

5 40.0 6.0 0.10 55.0 3.0 0.11


20

Investigating the dynamic behaviour of standard two-axle freight wagons shows that themost important parameters for the running behaviour of the vehicle are the suspensioncharacteristics. Variation in characteristics between different wagons is large due togeometrical tolerances of the components, wear, corrosion, moisture or other lubrication.The influence of the variation in suspension characteristics on the dynamic performanceis considerable. The variation in critical speed can be as much as ±20 km/h.

There are two principle different hunting modes for these types of wagons,

• wheelset hunting (usually in the frequency range 4-8 Hz),

• carbody hunting (usually in the frequency range 1.5-3 Hz).

However, carbody hunting can be caused by a resonance with several carbodyeigenmodes,

• carbody yaw,

• symmetric lower sway,

• anti-symmetric lower sway.

The flexible carbody has a strong influence on the running behaviour of loaded wagons.The frequency of the carbody yaw eigenmode is decreased when flexible properties ofthe carbody is considered. Further more the torsional flexibility allows a hunting motionpattern where the trailing and leading wheelsets move independently, the anti-symmetriclower sway.

For the loaded wagon it is generally carbody hunting that causes unfavourable rideconditions, at least at normal operational speeds. Carbody hunting causes increased trackforces and ride discomfort. At high conicity wheelset hunting can occur for speeds above140-150 km/h.

For empty wagons carbody hunting occurs at lower speeds than for the loaded wagon.Since the track forces are low and it is generally not safety critical, other than underspecial conditions, it may be acceptable. However, for the empty wagons wheelsethunting can occur at speeds around current operational speeds on track with low as wellas high conicity. To increase speed is not advisable without improving the suspension.

The quasistatic curving performance of two-axle freight wagons with link suspension isgood due to the relatively low pendulum stiffness. Radial steering down to curve radii of300 metre is possible under favourable conditions.

The primary suspension model for link suspension running gear is implemented in asimulation model for a two-axle freight wagon. The model can be used for bogie wagonswith link suspensions as well. Implementing the model in a bogie vehicle has not been apart of the present work. Hence, simulations of quasistatic curving behaviour for the linksuspension bogie in Paper F is performed with the previous model. However, thedifferences in quasistatic curving behaviour between the new and previous model aresmall.


21

4.4 Improved ride comfort

The variation of characteristics in link suspension running gear is, as discussed inSection 4.2, considerable and unfavourable conditions leading to hunting are likely tooccur. If the variation in characteristics can not be controlled within closer limitssupplementary means are needed in order to secure and improve ride qualities.

In this section the possibility to improve ride comfort and reduce track forces on standardfright wagons with link suspension is discussed. In Figure 15a) is a supplementary lateraland yaw-damper arrangement on a two-axled wagon shown. Lateral carbodyaccelerations from three tests are shown in Figure 15b). The original wagon is hunting at100 km/h resulting in high lateral acceleration levels. With supplementary hydraulicdampers the running performance is considerably improved. The ride comfort at 160 km/h can be better than for the original configuration at 100 km/h.

Supported by on-track tests and multibody dynamic simulations it is concluded that therunning behaviour of two-axle wagons with UIC double-link suspension as well aswagons with link suspension bogies (G-type) can be improved when the running gear areequipped with supplementary hydraulic dampers.

Figure 15: a) Lateral damper and yaw-damper arrangement on a two-axled wagon.b) Test results. Lateral carbody acceleration. Comparison between origi-nal wagon at 100 km/h and configuration with hydraulic lateral and yaw-damper at 100 km/h respectively 160 km/h.

4.5 Influence on track deterioration

Running characteristics of a railway vehicle, i.e. track forces and steering capability,affect the cost for track maintenance. One indicator of the steering capability is theenergy dissipation in the contact patch. In Figure 16 is the energy dissipation on theleading outer wheels shown. The curving performance of link suspension running gearare good, however, on a railway network with many sharp curves the curvingperformance of a standard Y25 bogie is not sufficient.

a) b)


22

Figure 16: Energy dissipation on leading outer wheel.

The marginal track deterioration cost, on railway network representable for freight trafficin Sweden, is calculated with a model developed by Öberg [92]. The curve radiidistribution used in this comparison is:

Radius PercentageTangent 62.0 %1500 m 11.6 %1200 m 8.6 %750 m 13.9 %500 m 2.8 %320 m 1.1 %

In Figure 17 is the marginal track deterioration cost per ton-km shown. The cost isnormalized with the total cost for the Y25 bogie. The total track deterioration cost perton-km is 30%-40% lower for the vehicles with link suspension than for the wagon withY25 bogie. Cost for wear and RCF is considerably higher for the Y25 bogie. The stifferprimary suspension of the Y25 bogie causes higher amount of RCF damage in largeradius curves respectively wear in small radius curves.

Figure 17: Track deterioration cost normalized with the total cost for the Y25 bogie.

Energy dissipation - leading outher wheel22.5 tonnes axleload - μ=0.35 - max 100 km/h

0

50

100

150

200

250

320 500 750 1200 1700 Curve radius [m]

Cant deficiency [mm]

En

erg

y d

issi

pat

ion

[N

m/m

]

Y25 - bogie

Link - bogie

2-axle

100 86 32 30 29

Track deterioration cost22.5 tonnes axleload

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1,2

2-axle Link-bogie Y25 bogie

No

rmal

ized

co

st

Settlement

Component fatigue

Wear and RCF

Total


23

5 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

5.1 Conclusions

Simulation results with the presented new model for two-axle freight wagons with UIClink suspension agree well with on-track test results. Hence, the model represents realityquite well, at least in the frequency range up till 15-20 Hz. The new model approach hasconsiderable influence on the running behaviour. For the loaded wagon the critical speedis increased by up to 50% compared to the old model.

The most important parameters for the running behaviour are the suspensioncharacteristics. At the same time the variation in the lateral and longitudinal suspensioncharacteristics is considerable. The reasons for the variation are differences in contactconditions between link and bearing caused by geometrical tolerances of thecomponents, wear, corrosion, moisture or other lubrication. The influence of thevariations in suspension characteristics on the dynamic performance of two-axle freightwagons is considerable. The variation in critical speed can be as much as ± 20 km/hdepending on the suspension characteristics.

There are two principle different hunting modes for these types of wagons,

• wheelset hunting (usually in the frequency range 4-8 Hz),

• carbody hunting (usually in the frequency range 1.5-3 Hz).

However, carbody hunting can be caused by a resonance with several carbodyeigenmodes,

• carbody yaw,

• symmetric lower sway,

• anti-symmetric lower sway.

The flexible carbody has a strong influence on the running behaviour of loaded wagons.The frequency of the carbody yaw eigenmode is decreased when flexible properties ofthe carbody is considered. Further more the torsional flexibility allows a hunting motionpattern where the trailing and leading wheelsets move independently, the anti-symmetriclower sway.

For the loaded wagon it is generally carbody hunting that causes unfavourable rideconditions, at least at normal operational speeds. Carbody hunting causes increased trackforces and ride discomfort. At high conicity wheelset hunting can occur for speeds above140-150 km/h.

For empty wagons carbody hunting occurs at lower speeds than for the loaded wagon.Since the track forces are low and it is generally not safety critical, other than underspecial conditions, it may be acceptable. However, for the empty wagons wheelsethunting can occur at speeds around current operational speeds on track with low as wellas high conicity. To increase speed is not advisable without improving the suspension.

The quasistatic curving performance of two-axle freight wagons with link suspension isgood due to the relatively low pendulum stiffness. Radial steering down to curve radii of300 metre is possible under favourable conditions.

Section 5 - Conclusions and Future Work

24

The vertical damping force in the trapezoidal leaf spring is high. Hence, the verticalstiffness is for small amplitudes high which leads to high vertical track forces and badride comfort.

It is possible to considerably improve the running behaviour of standard freight wagonswith link suspension running gear with supplementary hydraulic dampers. The ridecomfort is improved and the vertical as well as lateral track forces are reduced. Theflexible properties of the freight wagon underframe are important for the runningbehaviour as well as the characteristics of the suspension. As was shown for the two-axlewagon both yaw-dampers and lateral dampers are needed to achieve satisfactory runningbehaviour for all wheel-rail contact conditions. On low conicity carbody hunting is thedominant oscillation pattern. To reduce this motion lateral dampers between carbody (orbogie) and wheelset are needed. At high conicities only the wheelset is hunting. Thehunting frequency is significantly higher as for carbody hunting. Here only wheelset (orbogie) yaw damping efficiently suppresses the oscillations. If the stiffnesses in theprimary suspension are too low the possible improvement by adding dampers is limited.In this case satisfactory dynamic vehicle behaviour cannot be achieved.

It is concluded that the traffic induced marginal cost differs considerably betweenwagons with Y25 bogie, link bogie and 2-axle freight wagons with link suspension. Thecost per ton-km is 30%-40% lower for wagons with link suspension. On a railwaynetwork with many sharp curves the worse curving performance of the standard Y25bogie will have significant influence on the maintenance cost.

Axleload is probably the most important parameter for settlement and componentfatigue. At 25 tonnes axleload the track deterioration cost is 20-30% higher compared tothe reference case with 22.5 tonnes axleload.

The quasistatic load redistribution between high and low rail is considerable for wagonswith high centre of gravity running at high cant deficiency. The higher deterioration costinduced has to be kept in mind when increasing the height and size of the loading gaugefor freight wagons.

5.2 Future work

The wheel-rail interface can be improved from a national Swedish perspective. TheS1002 wheel profile is optimised for 1:40 rail inclination and the P8 profile for a railinclination of 1:20. In Sweden the track is laid with a rail inclination of 1:30. It should bepossible to develop a wheel profile that is better adapted to this condition. The wheel-railinterface is also an important issue from a European perspective, e.g. for a freight wagongoing from Germany to France, cf. Figure 2.

With enhanced wheel-rail contact geometry, i.e. initially a slightly higher conicity thentoday, and sharpened requirements for maintenance of the suspension components theride comfort for loaded wagons can probably be improved.

Today wheelset hunting limits the possibility to increase speed of empty wagons. If newmaterials are introduced in the suspension components, that are resistant to wear andgive more precise friction behaviour, the suspension characteristics can be designedmore precisely. Then the variation of suspension characteristics would be less over thelife span of the suspension components. With increased initial stiffness and damping in


25

the links the critical speed is increased. As long as the longitudinal pendulum stiffness iskept at todays level the influence on the curving performance would be moderate, thegood curving performance would remain.

With increased utilization of the railway network the deterioration rate is likely toincrease. However, the deterioration rate can be kept constant or even reduced by using astrengthened track design i.e. a heavier type of rail, larger sleepers and shorter sleeperspacing. The track forces can be reduced building special freight lines avoiding largecant deficiency or cant excess. With smaller track irregularities the dynamic contributionto the track forces can be reduced.

The dynamic contribution of the vertical track forces is of considerable magnitude.Freight wagons with UIC standard running gear exist in vast numbers. Finding costeffective solutions to improve the running behaviour in order to improve ride comfortand reduce the wheel-rail contact forces is important to improve transport quality andreduce maintenance cost.

In Europe 2-axle freight wagons are widely used. In Sweden a freight network withincreased loading gauge and axle load is built up. The effect of traffic with 2-axle freightwagons operating at high axle load should be further investigated.

Recently some novel freight wagon running gear designs have been introduced inEurope. The influence of a larger introduction of these types on the transport cost shouldbe investigated as a basis for future investment in freight wagons.

Section 5 - Conclusions and Future Work

26


27

REFERENCES

[1] ABC-NACO Europe: Higher axle load and lower track forces? Axle Motion bogie for 25 t axle load, Pamphlet, 2000.

[2] Andersson E., Berg M. and Stichel, S.: Rail Vehicle Dynamics, KTH Railway Technology, Stockholm, 2005.

[3] Auroy M.: SNCF to launch Europe’s fastest freight trains, Railway Gazette International, 1987, p 98-99.

[4] Axelsson J. and Nellgran Å.: Lateral and longitudinal stiffness of UIC double- link primary suspension (in Swedish: Lateral och longitudinal styvhet för primärfjädring med UIC dubbellänk). Laboratorierapport 8323-9g, SJ, Stockholm, 1982.

[5] Ayasse J.B. eth. al.: Computer simulation of freight vehicles with leaf springs; a comparison between different packages, Technical report, INRETS, 2001, INRETS/RE-01-046-FR.

[6] Berg M.: A rubber spring model for dynamic analysis of rail vehicles, TRITA – FKT Report 1995:53, KTH Railway Technology, Stockholm, 1995.

[7] Bohumil V. and Bohumin J.: Drehgestelle mit erhöhter dynamischer Steifigkeit für grössere Radsatzlasten, ZEV-Glasers Annalen 125, 2001, p 35-40.

[8] Bosso N. Gugliotta A. and Somà A.: Simulation of a freight bogie with friction

dampers, In 5th ADAMS/rail Users Conference, Haarlem, The Netherlands, May 10-11, 2000.

[9] Burstow M. C.: Whole Life Rail Model Application and Develpment for RRSB - Development of an CF Damage Parameter, AEA Technology, Derby.

[10] Bullock R. L.: The development and service results of a cross braced radial freight car truck, Proceedings of the economics and performance of freight car trucks, 1983, Montreal, Canada, p 59-68.

[11] Cebon D.: Simulation of the Response of Leaf Springs to Broad Band Random Excitation, Vehicle System Dynamics, 15, p 375-392, 1986.

[12] Dancoisine J. M.: Introduction of 160 km/h freight trains, Rail International, 1988, p 29-34.

[13] ERRI: Dynamic behaviour of two-axled wagons for a 22.5 t axelload and a wheelbase of less than 8 m, for speeds of 100 and 120 km/h, Question B12 Report 67, 1997.

References

28

[14] ERRI: Dynamic behaviour of two-axled wagons with a wheelbase of < 8 m, Question B12 Report 72, 2001.

[15] Etwell M. W. J.: Advances in rail wagon design, IMechE Part F Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, 1990, p 45-53.

[16] Evans J. R. and Roger P. J.: Validation of Dynamic Simulations of Rail Vehicles with Friction Damped Y25 Bogies, Proceedings of the 15th IAVSD Symposium, Vol. 29, Vehicle System Dynamics, 1998, p 219-233.

[17] Fancher P.S. et. alt.: Measurements and Representation of the Mechanical Properties of Truck Leaf Springs, SAE-P 800905, 1980.

[18] Frederich F.: Erkenntnisse über das Fahrverhalten von Güterwagen-Drehgestellen, Archiv für Eisenbahntechnik, 1984, p 21-32.

[19] Grzelak A. and Piotrowski J.: Parametric identification of sub-models of a

mathematical model of UIC link suspension with worn elements, Proc. of the 16th international conference PRORAIL, 2003.

[20] Harding A.: Development of the TF25 “track-friendly” bogie, IMechE seminar on Railway Rolling Stock, 1998, p 43-53.

[21] Hawthorne V. T.: Recent improvements to three-piece trucks, Proceedings of the 1996 ASME/IEEE joint railroad conference, 1996, p 151-161.

[22] Hawthorne T. V., Sellberg P. R. and Wronkiewicz D. R.: Effect of maintenance practices upon performance of freight car railroad trucks - Progress report, Technical paper presented at the 1990 ASME/IEEE joint railroad conference, 1990, p 1-12.

[23] Hecht M.: European freight vehicle running gear: today’s position and future demands, Proc. of the Inst. of Mech. Engrs., Part F, Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, 2001, Vol 215, p 1-11.

[24] Hecht M.: In search of a quieter, lighter freight bogie, Railway Gazette International, September, 2002, p 563-568.

[25] Hecht M. and Keudel J.: Close-to-Reality Simulation of the Y25 Bogie by Implementation of Measured Characteristics, 6th International Conference on Railways Bogies and Running Gear, Budapest, 2004.

[26] Hecht M. and Schirmer A.: The “LEILA-DG” project: a quiet, leight-weight bogie for freight wagons, Railway Technical Review, 2, 2004, p 33-38.

[27] Hoffmann M.: Dynamic of European two-axle freight wagons, PhD thesis, IMM-PHD-2006-170, DTU Lyngby, Danmark, 2006.


29

[28] Jendel T.: Dynamic analysis of a freight wagon with modified Y25 bogies, TRITA-FKT Report 1997:48, KTH Railway Technology, Stockholm, 1997.

[29] Jönsson P-A.: Freight wagon running gear – a review, TRITA – FKT Report 2002:35, KTH Railway Technology, Stockholm, 2002.

[30] Jönsson P-A.: Modelling and Laboratory Investigations on Freight Wagon Link Suspension, with respect to Vehicle-Track Dynamic Interaction, Licentiate Thesis, TRITA AVE 2004:48, KTH Railway Technology, Stockholm, 2004.

[31] Jönsson P-A., Anderson E. and Stichel S.: Experimental and Theoretical Analysis of Freight Wagon Link Suspension, Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, proc. of IMechE, Part F, Vol. 220, No. F4, London 2006, p 361-372.

[32] Jönsson P-A., Anderson E. and Stichel S.: Influence of link suspension characteristics variation on two-axle freight wagon dynamics, Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. 44, Supplement, 2006, p 415-423.

[33] Khatchadourian V.: Comparative performance of new generation freight car trucks, Proceedings of the economics and performance of freight car trucks, 1983, Montreal, Canada, p 179-186.

[34] Koffman J. L.: The lateral riding of four-wheel wagons - some fundamental considerations related to frequensies and forces, Railway Gazette, May, 1963, p 282-288.

[35] Koffman J. L.: U.I.C. double-link wagon suspension - Reasons for use and rate of wear, Railway Gazette, July, 1964, p 605-608.

[36] Koffman J. L.: Die Rahmenverscheibung der dreiteilegen Drehgestelle der Bauart Diamond, ZEV-Glasers Annalen 98, 1974, p 56-60.

[37] Kufver B.: Optimisation of horizontal alignments for railways - Procedures involving evaluation of dynamic vehicle response, Doctoral Thesis, TRITA-FKT report 2000:47, KTH Railway Technology, Stockholm, 2000.

[38] Kure G., Skiller J. and Gedenk V.: Gigabox - Integration of rubber springs with hydraulic damping in the axlebox housing, 37. Tagung Moderne Scheinenfahrzeuge, Graz, 2007.

[39] Lange H.: Dynamic analysis of a freight car with standard UIC single-axle running gear, TRITA – FKT Report 1996:34, KTH Railway Technology, Stockholm, 1996.

[40] Lange H.: Simulation des Fahrferhaltens zweiachsiger Güterwagon, ZEV+DET Glas. Ann. 122, march, 1998, p 91-98.

References

30

[41] List H. A. and Bailey E. C.: Development of a retrofit steering assembly for standard AAA freight car trucks, Proceedings of the economics and performance of freight car trucks, 1983, Montreal, Canada, p 69-76.

[42] Meridian Rail Europe: Track friendly freight bogies for 25 t axle load, UIC seminar, Frankfurt, 2002.

[43] Madeyski T.: Die Güterwagen-Drehgestelle Y25 und 665, Eisenbahntechnische Rundschau 27, 1978, p 713-720.

[44] Madeyski T.: Laufverkskonstruktion und Erhöhung der Radsatslasten im Güterverkehr, ZEV-Glasers Annalen 107, 1983, p 139-147.

[45] McLean L. A.: Second generation freight car trucks - Penecea or Vexation, Proceedings of the economics and performance of freight car trucks, 1983, Montreal, Canada, p 7-10.

[46] McKeown F. , Pitchford T. , Steffen J. J. and Wronkiewicz, R.: High capacity integrated truck, Proceedings of the 2001 ASME/IEEE joint railroad conference, 2001, p 193-199.

[47] Moron P.: A standard UIC bogie for freight wagons - The Y25 bogie, variants and development, Revue Generale des Chemins de fer, 1971.

[48] Mulder J. M. and Tournay H. M.: Spoornet’s experience refines steering bogies, Railway Gazette International, May, 1996, p 301-304.

[49] Müller L.: Konzepte für Güterwagenlaufwerke für Geschwindigkeiten über 120 km/h, Eisenbahntechnische Rundschau 37, 1988, p 799-802.

[50] Müller L. and Niermeyer W.: Weiterentwickelte Güterwagen-Drehgestelle der Deutschen Bundesbahn für 22.5 t Radsatzlast - wieder nach dem Lenkachsprinzip, ZEV-Glasers Annalen 111, 1987, p 188-196.

[51] Müller L. and Gebhard H.: Laufwerke für hohe Geschwindigkeiten bei Güterwagen, Eisenbahntechnische Rundschau 39, 1990, p 661-666.

[52] Nelldal B-L.: Efficient train systems for freight transport - A systems study - Principal Report, KTH Railway Group Report 0505, Stockholm, 2005.

[53] Nielsen J.: Model of the freight wagon bogie Y25 for dynamic analysis in GENSYS (in Swedish: Modell av godsvagnsboggi Y25 för gångdynamisk analys i GENSYS), Prosolvia Research & Technology, 1996.

[54] ORE B12/Rp25: Flexibility of trapezoidal springs, ORE B12 Rp 25, 2nd edition, Utrecht, 1986.


31

[55] ORE B12/Rp43: Parabolic springs for wagons (design, calculation, treatment), ORE B12 Rp 43, Utrecht, 1988.

[56] ORE B37/Rp1: Untersuchung Zwecks Endgültiger wahl der Federaufhängung fur die Offenen Güterwagen, 1st edition, Utrecht, March, 1959.

[57] ORE B56/Rp2: Improvement of the running stability of existing RIV wagons required to run under any loading conditions at speeds of 80 km/h, ORE, Utrecht, March 1967.

[58] ORE C116/Rp 8: Method for assessing Riding Qualities in Vehicles, Utrecht, Netherlands, 1977.

[59] ORE DT30: Etude de la stabilité transversale d'un véhicule ferroviaire à deux essieux, par M. R. Joly, Technical Document, ORE, Utrecht, January 1974.

[60] Pascal J. P.: Oscillations and chaotic behaviour of unstable railway wagons over large distances, Chaos, Solutions & Fractals 5(9), 1995, p 1725-1753.

[61] Persson I.: Using GENSYS.0603, ISBN 91-631-3111-0, AB DEsolver, Östersund, Sweden.

[62] Pollard M. G.: The development of cross-braced freight bogies, Rail International, 1979, p 736-758.

[63] Powell Duffryn: TF25SA Single Axle Suspension, Pamphlet, 2001.

[64] prEN 14363: Railway applications - Testing for the acceptance of running characteristics of railway vehicles - Testing of running behaviour and stationary tests, CEN, final draft, June, 2005.

[65] Piotrowski J.: Model of the UIC link suspension for freight wagons, Archive of Applied Mechanics 73, 2003, p 517-532.

[66] Polach O.: On non-linear methods of bogie stability assessment using computer simulations, Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, proc. of IMechE, part F, Vol 220, No. F1, London, 2006, p 13-27.

[67] Scales B. T.: Scales-Devine radial bogie: a solution to wheel/rail interaction, Rail Engineering International, 1979, p 43-44.

[68] Scales B. T.: Review of contemporary freight car bogie design, IMechE seminar on Railway Rolling Stock, 1996, p 97-110.

[69] Scheffel H.: Die Konstruktion der Kreuzanker-Drehgestelle der Südafrikanischen Eisenbahnen, ZEV-Glasers Annalen 110, 1986, p 203-208.

References

32

[70] Shakerley T.: An engineering change, European Railway Review, Issue 4, 2006, p 62-67.

[71] Smith B. and Harding A.: Low track force bogie widens options, Railway Gazette International, 1988, p 589-593.

[72] Smith R. E.: The theory and performance of frame-braced freight trucks, Proceedings of the economics and performance of freight car trucks, 1983, Montreal, Canada, p 111-117.

[73] Specht W.: Neue Erkentnisse über das Verschleissverhalten von Güterwagendrehgestellen, ZEV-Glasers Annalen 111, 1987, p 271-280.

[74] Stichel S.: Running behaviour of railway freight wagons with single-axle running gear. TRITA-FKT Report 1998:40, KTH Railway Technology, Stockholm, 1998.

[75] Stichel S.: On freight wagon dynamics and track deterioration. Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, Proc. of IMechE, Part F, Vol. 213, No. F4, London, 1999, p 243-254.

[76] Stichel S.: How to Improwe the Running behaviour of Freight Wagons with UIC-Link Suspension, Vehicle System Dynamics, Supplement 33, 1999, p 394-405.

[77] Stichel S.: Modellirung und Parameterstudien zom Fahrverhalten von Güterwagen mit UIC-Fahrwerken, ZEV+DET Glas. Ann. 123, Juli/August, 1999, p 289-296.

[78] Stichel S.: Running behaviour of freight wagons with link bogies - A parametric study, TRITA - FKT Report 1999:12, KTH Rail Vehicles, Stockholm, 1999.

[79] Stichel S.: The influence of underframe structural flexibility on the hunting behaviour of a freight wagon, Computers in Railways VII, ISBN 1-85312-826-0, 2000, p 725-736.

[80] Stichel S.: Limit Cycle Behaviour and Chaotic Motions of Two-Axle Freight Wagons with Friction Damping, Multibody System Dynamics, 8, 2002, p 243-255.

[81] Stiepel M. and Zeipel S.: Freight wagon running gears with leaf spring and ring suspension, Paper presented at the SIMPACK user group meeting, 2004.

[82] Thomas D.: Development and Verification of a Multibody Dynamic Simulation Model for a Freight Wagon with Powell Duffryn TF25SA Running Gear, TRITA AVE 2003:18, KTH Railway Technology, Stockholm, 2003.

[83] True H.: Does a critical speed for railway vehicle exist?, In Proceedings of the 1994 ASME/IEEE Joint railroad Conference, Chicago, Illinois, 22-24 March, 1994, p 125-131.


33

[84] True H.: On the Theory of Nonlinear Dynamics and its Applications in Vehicle System Dynamics, Vehicle System Dynamics, 33, 1999, p 393-421.

[85] True H.: Nonlinear Railway Dynamics, new Basis, methods and Results, Glasers Annalen, 128, 2004, p 526-537.

[86] UIC: UIC Leaflet 510-1 – Wagons – Running gear – Normalization,

UIC, 9th edition, Paris, 1995.

[87] UIC: UIC Leaflet 517 – Wagons – Suspension gear – Standardization,

UIC, 6th edition, Paris, 1985.

[88] UIC: UIC Leaflet 518 - Test and approval of railway vehicles from the point of

view of dynamic behaviour, safety, track fatigue and quality of ride. UIC, 3rd edition, Paris, October 2005.

[89] UIC Code 519: Method for determining the equivalent conicity, International

Union of Railways, 1st edition, Paris, December 2004.

[90] UIC: UIC Leaflet 530-2 – Wagons – Running safety,

UIC, 4th edition, International Union of Railways, Paris, 1985.

[91] Wrang M.: Litt. Laagrs-w, force/displacement measurements (in Swedish: Litt. Laagrs-w kraft/förskjutnings-mätningar), TrainTech Laboratorierapport 0147-62g, 2001.

[92] Öberg J.: Track Deterioration of Ballasted Tracks, TRITA AVE 2006:88, KTH Rail Vehicles, Stockholm, 2006.

References

34

Dynamic VehiclerT-ack Interaction of European Standard ...12382/FULLTEXT01.pdf · Dynamic...

Documents

Transcript of Dynamic VehiclerT-ack Interaction of European Standard ...12382/FULLTEXT01.pdf · Dynamic...