0 Voturi pozitive0 Voturi negative

439 (de) vizualizări7 paginiFeb 23, 2010

© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

439 (de) vizualizări

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race
- Hidden Figures Young Readers' Edition
- The Law of Explosive Growth: Lesson 20 from The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership
- The E-Myth Revisited: Why Most Small Businesses Don't Work and
- The Wright Brothers
- The Power of Discipline: 7 Ways it Can Change Your Life
- The Other Einstein: A Novel
- The Kiss Quotient: A Novel
- State of Fear
- State of Fear
- The 10X Rule: The Only Difference Between Success and Failure
- Being Wrong: Adventures in the Margin of Error
- Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions
- The Black Swan
- Prince Caspian
- The Art of Thinking Clearly
- A Mind for Numbers: How to Excel at Math and Science Even If You Flunked Algebra
- The Last Battle
- The 6th Extinction
- HBR's 10 Must Reads on Strategy (including featured article "What Is Strategy?" by Michael E. Porter)

Sunteți pe pagina 1din 7

April 4 – 6, 2006, Atlanta Georgia

JRC2006-94038

FORCE ON SHORT WAVELENGTH DEFECTS

Yan Quan Sun

Colin Cole

Centre for Railway Engineering

Central Queensland University

North Rockhampton, QLD 4702

Australia

Tel: 61 7 49309287, Email mailto:y.q.sun@cqu.edu.au

research, a detailed simulation analysis has been carried out

For wagons with three-piece bogies, the suspension

using a model of wagon-track dynamics interaction. In this

dynamic characteristics are largely dependent on the friction

model, the wagon is modelled using 66 degrees of freedom,

condition of the wedge dampers. The influence of changes in

accounting for the three dimensional movements of all wagon

wedge friction conditions on the dynamic wheel load is

components. The track is modelled with the rails described

investigated. Comprehensive wagon-track modelling has been

using Timoshenko beams and discretely supported by the

developed for the analysis. Simulations show that a small

spring and damper elements representing the elasticity of pads,

friction coefficient on the wedge contact surfaces can lead to

fasteners and ballast. Assumed track geometry irregularity – top

the severe resonance of suspension system, causing large

surface profile with 15 parallel perturbations with a wavelength

dynamic wheel loads and high levels of wheel unloading while

of 1.676 m in length, and a vertical amplitude to the track

with a large friction coefficient, suspension resonance is

surface of 12 mm peak to peak, is used. Wagon speed is in the

restricted, leading to smaller dynamic wheel loads.

range of 12.7 – 60 kph so that the track input frequency is in the

range of 2 – 10 Hz. Suspension dynamic characteristics and the

1. INTRODUCTION dynamic wheel loads corresponding to the wedge friction

It has been well known that wagon and track dynamics conditions at the different track input frequencies are discussed.

originates from the dynamic interactions between wagon and

track at the wheel-rail interface. 2. WAGON-TRACK MODELLING

In this section, the modelling of vehicle-track system

The dynamic wheel load is an important parameter in the dynamics for the investigation on suspension dynamic

assessment of wagon and track operation conditions. For characteristics of three-piece bogie is given. The dynamic

example, Jenkins et al. [1] presented P1 and P2 forces from vehicle-track system is divided into three subsystems – vehicle,

dynamic wheel load due to rail dipped joints, and limits were track and wheel-rail contact, which are described in the

suggested for these forces. Many theoretical and experimental following subsections respectively.

investigations [1] ~ [18] have been done to determine the

dynamic wheel load. The results show that the dynamic wheel

load is dependent on track geometry irregularities (cross level, 2.1 Wagon Subsystem

alignment, top surface and gauge variations), wheel and rail Wagon subsystem includes one wagon car body, two

defects (wheel flats, wheel burns, rail dipped joints, and rail bolsters, four sideframes and four wheelsets. The wagon car

corrugations), vehicle speed, static wheel load and unsprung body rests on two bolsters through two centre bowls and four

mass, and track modulus and track mass. constant-contact side bearings. Each centre bowl is modeled as

four point contacts through the spring and friction elements

In our ongoing research on the vertical suspension dynamic along the longitudinal, lateral and vertical directions. The

characteristics of the three-piece bogie due to track geometry constant-contact side bearing is simplified as a spring element

irregularity – top surface variation with short wavelength, it has in the vertical direction. In the longitudinal direction, the car

been found that the suspension dynamics is largely dependent body is connected with two couplers, which are represented as

springs. The bolster is supported by the suspensions. The u 4 ( i −1) + k = − w4 ( i −1) + k ( −1) k ⋅ tan α (i = 1, 2; k = 1, 4)

sideframe is an intermediate structure that provides seating for

the suspensions and connects to the wheelsets through steel- from contact surface 2

steel contact that is represented as stiff springs. Nonlinear

connection characteristics such as lift-off among wagon

u [

4 ( i −1) + k = x6 i +1 + x6 i + 5 ⋅ (H bw − ∆wik ) + x6i + 6 ⋅ Bss (−1) −

j

]

components are fully considered. In this paper, the “constant- (x12i + 6 j +1 + x12i + 6 j + 5 ⋅ H sfw )

damping” wedge located in the sideframe is considered, and its

modelling takes account of the wedge inertia and is described ( j = 1, 2 ; if k = 1 or 2, j = 1; if k = 3 or 4, j = 2)

as follows: from contact surface 1

(1)

Fig. 1 shows the friction wedge modelling.

In which x6i +1 , x6i +5 and x6i + 6 are the longitudinal

displacement, the pitch and yaw rotations of bolster; x12i + 6 j +1

and x12i +6 j +5 are the longitudinal displacement and the pitch

rotation of sideframes; The subscripts j represents the

numbers of sideframes; Bss is the lateral semi distance

between two wedges; H bw is the vertical distance between

(Wedge Type) mass centres of wedge and bolster at the static situation; ∆wik

Zwg (i=1, 2; k=1, 4) is the vertical relative displacement between wedge and bolster;

and H sfw are the vertical distance between mass centres of

wedge and sideframe. So, the dynamic equations of friction

kw Surface 1 Wedge #2 Wedge #1

wedge along longitudinal and vertical directions are:

w 4(i-1)+k Xwg Bolster

u4(i-1)+k

Surface 2

mwgg N1(4(i-1)+k) [ ]

mwg u&&4(i −1)+ k + (&x&12i + 6 j +1 + &x&12i +6 j +5 ⋅ H sfw ) = − N1(4(i −1)+ k ) (− 1)k +

F2(4(i-1)+k) Wedge #4 Wedge #3

N2(4(i −1)+ k ) (− 1) ⋅ cosα − F2(4(i −1)+ k ) (− 1) ⋅ sinα

i i

α F1(4(i-1)+k)

N2(4(i-1)+k)

(Wedge Modelling) (Wedge Numbering) [ ( )]

&&4(i −1)+ k + &x&12i + 6 j +3 + &x&12i +6 j +5 Lww (− 1)i = − F1(4(i −1)+ k ) +

mwg w

N2(4(i −1)+ k ) sinα + F2(4(i −1)+ k ) ⋅ cosα − kw (w0 + w(4(i −1)+ k ) ) − mwg g

Fig. 1 Friction Wedge Modelling

(2)

In Fig. 1, N1( 4(i −1)+ k ) and F1( 4 (i −1)+ k ) , and N 2 ( 4 (i −1)+ k )

In which m wg is the mass of friction wedge, and Lww are

and F2( 4(i −1)+ k ) are the normal and friction forces on the the semi longitudinal distance between two wedges.

contact surface 1 and contact surface 2, the subscripts i and k

represent the numbers of bolsters and wedges respectively, In Eq. (2), the wedge friction force on contact surface 1 is

calculated using the following Eq. (3).

u 4(i −1)+ k and w4(i −1)+ k are the longitudinal and vertical relative

displacements of wedge to sideframe, and α is the wedge − N

1( 4 ( i −1) + k ) ⋅ µ if Vr ≤ −ε

angle.

µ ε ⋅Vr ⋅ N 1( 4 (i −1) + k )

The assumptions concerning wedge friction are made as F1( 4 (i −1) + k ) = if − ε < Vr < ε

follows: (

1 + (Vr ε ) 2 ) 4

• Surface 1 and 2 are always in contact, and N 1( 4(i −1) + k ) ⋅ µ if Vr ≥ ε

• Surface 1 and 2 are in sliding situation (e.g. friction is (3)

‘saturated’ on both surfaces).

In which Vr is relative velocity between bolster and

The second assumption is consistent with that used in sideframe, µ is the friction coefficient of wedge, and ε is the

many publications [19]-[23]. According to above assumptions,

relative velocity magnitude (5 ~ 7 mm/s) above which the

u 4(i −1)+ k and w4(i −1)+ k satisfy the following sliding constraints: coefficient of friction becomes definitively constant.

Except for the suspension elements including wedge modes of the rail beam) for both the linear displacements and

dampers, all the other components of wagon are considered as the angular rotations. The governing equations of dynamic

rigid bodies with masses and mass inertia moments along the equilibrium for the track are expressed in the following matrix

three Cartesian coordinate directions. All movements of the form:

wagon subsystem are taken into account. The total degrees of

freedom (Dofs) required to describe the longitudinal, lateral and ~

the vertical displacements and rotations of the full wagon are

M T d&&T + C T d&T + K T d T = FWT (5)

listed in Table 1 in which u , v , w are the linear

displacements and φ x , φ y , φ z are the rotations about X , Y In which M T , C T and K T (each of size 10nm × 10nm )

are the mass, damping and stiffness matrices of the track

and Z axes respectively. As shown, there are 66 Dofs required

to fully define the wagon dynamics. subsystem. The vector d T contains displacement of the track

subsystem that includes the modal and physical displacements,

Table 1 Degrees of Freedom of Wagon ~

and FWT is the combined wheel-rail interface force vector.

Components u v w φx φy φz

Wagon Car 2.3 Wheel-Rail Interface Subsystem

Body × × × × × ×

Under rolling contact the wheel and the rail produce

Bolster × × × × × × contact forces in the normal direction on the wheel-rail contact

Sideframe × × × × × × plane. In addition, creep forces are generated in the longitudinal

and the lateral directions tangential to the contacting plane, and

Wheelset × × × × × × creep moment about the normal direction. In this paper, the

Total Dofs 1×6+2×6+4×6+4×6 = 66 normal contact force Fnwr due to the wheel-rail rolling contact

is determined using Hertz contact theory and can be expressed

The equations of dynamic equilibrium can be written using in Eq. (6):

multi-body mechanics method as shown below:

Fnwr =

0 if wR − ww − µ ( x) < 0

Where M W , C W and K W are the mass, damping and (6)

stiffness matrices of the wagon subsystem. These matrices are

66 × 66 respectively. d W is the displacement vector of the In which C H is Hertz contact coefficient, wR is the

wagon subsystem, and FWT is the wheel-rail interface force vertical displacement of rail at the contact point, ww is the

vector consisting of the wheel-rail normal contact forces, vertical displacement of wheel at the contact point, and µ (x )

tangent creep forces and creep moments about normal direction is the function representing the track geometry irregularity.

in the wheel-rail contact plane.

supported distributed-parameter track modelling with one layer. 3.1 Wagon-Track Parameters

In the model, all the track components beneath rails used in the

A wagon and track system was selected for examining the

conventional ballasted heavy haul track structure are simplified

dynamic behaviours of suspension systems with two types of

as the spring and damper elements, which discretely support the

friction wedges. In the model, the length of track is chosen to

rails at an interval of sleeper spacing.

be 146 sleeper spacings because it would be considered that the

deflections and their differential values are closed to zero at

The lateral and the vertical bending and shear deformations two boundary sections when the wagon travels a distance of 55

of the rail beam are described using Timoshenko beam theory meters. The list of some important parameters of the system is

extended by considering the torque of the rail beam. Thus, there provided in Table 2. The model containing the system of one

are five Dofs at any point along the longitudinal neutral axis of wagon and a section of track results in 1266 equations of

the rail beam, namely, lateral and vertical displacements and motion as described:

rotations about the lateral ( Y ) and vertical ( Z ) axes and the

torsional rotation about the longitudinal ( X ) axis used in the Number of Dof used for one wagon = 66;

formulation of the rail beam. For simplicity, the dynamic Number of modes for the rail beams = 120;

equilibrium equations of the rail beam has been expanded using Total Dof = 66+ 120×10 = 1266.

Fourier series in the longitudinal ( X ) direction by assigning

equal number of terms ( nm , also known as the number of

Table 2 Some Parameters for a Wagon and Track System 4. CHARACTERISTICS OF DYNAMIC RESPONSES

Parameter Value The simulations have been completed for the bogie bounce

modes over a range of track input frequencies from 2 to 10 Hz.

Wagon In the simulations, the friction condition on wedge surfaces was

Wagon car body mass 48050 kg

varied. The friction coefficients with 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3 were

Mass of bolster 365 kg chosen respectively.

Mass of sideframe 447.5 kg

Wheelset mass 1120 kg

Figs. 3 (a) and (b), 4 (a) and (b), and 5 (a), (b) and (c) show

Stiffness coefficient of suspension along Z axis 2.555×106 N/m

Semi distance of two bogie mass centres 5.18 m

the dynamic responses – vertical suspension forces, dynamic

Semi lateral distance between the left and the right wheel load factor (dynamic wheel load divided by the static

0.8001 m wheel load) and vertical wedge friction forces around the

suspensions

Semi wheelset base 0.8375 m location of friction wedge #1 with the wedge friction

Mass of friction wedge 8 kg coefficients of 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3 at the track input frequencies of

Stiffness coefficient of wedge spring 146×103 N/m 2.3 Hz, 3 Hz and 6 Hz respectively.

Wedge angle 0.654 rad 140

Reference preload of wedge spring 30 kN

Friction Coe. of 0.1

120 Friction Coe. of 0.2

Track Friction Coe. of 0.3

100

Rail mass per meter 60 kg/m

Sleeper spacing 0.685 m 80

Track modulus 40 MPa

60

Wheel-Rail Interface

Hertz spring constant 0.87×1011 N/ m3/2 40

20

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

In order to obtain the wagon bounce mode only, the top Time (s)

surface irregularity shown in Fig. 2 is used. Using sinusoidal

track irregularity profiles different wagon speeds can be (a) Suspension Force

selected to excite the dynamic responses of bogie suspensions 2.5

at different frequencies for the wagon bounce mode only, i.e., v Friction Coe. of 0.1

Friction Coe. of 0.2

2 Friction Coe. of 0.3

Dynamic Wheel Load Factor

selected. Bogie pitch motions are excluded as vertical axle 1

motions are synchronised. Wagon speed is in the range of 12.7

– 60 kph so that the track input frequency is in the range of 2 – 0.5

10 Hz.

0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Z Bogie Time (s)

X Fig. 3 Dynamic Responses at 2.3 Hz

0 x0 a 90

70

Vertical Suspension Force (kN)

Bogie Bounce 60

µ (x )

40

Friction Coe. of 0.1

Friction Coe. of 0.2

can be expressed as: 20

Friction Coe. of 0.3

10

a

µ (x ) = {1 − cos[2π (x − x0 ) λ ]} (7) 0

Time (s)

4.5 5.5 6.5 7.5

1.6

1.4

input profile at a frequency of 2.3 Hz equal to vertical natural

1.2

frequency of suspension without damping

Dynamic Wheel Load Factor

1

1 2 K se

( = 2.3 Hz in which mc - wagon car body

2π 0.5mc + mb

0.8

0.6

0.4

Friction Coe . of 0.1 mass, mb - bolster mass, and K se - stiffness coefficient of

Friction Coe . of 0.2

0.2

Friction Coe . of 0.3

secondary suspension set) and the friction coefficient on the

wedge surfaces is 0.1, the suspension is in severe resonance so

0

0.6 1.6 2.6 3.6 4.6 5.6 6.6

that the suspension force is quickly expanding as shown in Fig.

Time (s) 3 (a), leading to the wheel lifting off the rail as shown in Fig. 3

(b) Wheel Dynamic Load (b) and the simulation terminated. It means that the friction

Fig. 4 Dynamic Responses at 3 Hz wedge with friction coefficient of 0.1 does not sufficiently

control and limit the resonance of wagon car body. It can be

75

also seen that when the wedge friction coefficients are 0.2 and

70

0.3 respectively, the friction on wedge surfaces can restrict the

wagon car body resonance because it seems large enough to

Vertical Suspension Force (kN)

relative displacement between them so that the suspension

60 force is very small as shown in Fig. 3 (a). Correspondingly, the

dynamic wheel load factor is small as shown in Fig. 3 (b).

55

If the track input frequency is increased slightly from the

Friction Coe. of 0.2

Friction Coe. of 0.3

vertical natural frequency 2.3 Hz of suspension, for example, to

45 3Hz, the dynamic responses are quite different. At first, for all

0.5 1.0 1.5

Time (s)

2.0 2.5 3.0

wedge friction conditions, the wagon keeps running without the

wheel lifting out of rail at the track input frequency of 3 Hz.

(a) Suspension Force Due to 3 Hz being close to the vertical natural frequency of

suspension, the small wedge friction (e.g. 0.1) allows the larger

1.6

suspension force and dynamic wheel load than those with the

1.4

Friction Coe. of 0.2 high wedge friction (e.g. 0.3) as shown in Fig. 4 (a) and (b).

Friction Coe. of 0.3

However, if the track input frequency is increased significantly,

Dynamic Wheel Load Factor

1.2 for example, to 6 Hz, the dynamic responses are just the

converse to those at 3 Hz. The high wedge friction (e.g. 0.3)

1.0

causes the larger suspension force and dynamic wheel load as

shown in Fig. 5 (a) and (b) than those by the low wedge friction

0.8

(e.g. 0.1). From Fig. 5 (b), it can be seen that a higher

0.6

frequency component superimposed upon the basic frequency

component of 6 Hz for the time history of dynamic wheel load.

0.4 The wedge friction force also shows this high frequency

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

component as shown in Fig. 5 (c). This frequency at

Time (s)

approximately 22 Hz is very close to the natural frequency of

(b) Wheel Dynamic Load 1 Kw

wedge mass-spring system without damping ( = 21

20 2π mw

15

Hz in which mw - wedge mass and K w - stiffness coefficient

of wedge spring). This means that at a high track input

Vertical Friction Force (kN)

10

5

effect on the dynamic wheel load.

0

LOAD

-10 Friction Coe. of 0.1

Friction Coe. of 0.2

Friction Coe. of 0.3

As discussed in above section, the dynamic characteristics

-15

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

of suspension system are quite different at the different track

Time (s) input frequencies. In this section, further simulations have been

(c) Wedge Friction Force carried out to illustrate the relationships between the dynamic

Fig. 5 Dynamic Responses at 6 Hz wheel load and the track input frequency. For better

presentation of result outputs, a dynamic force factor input frequency with 2 – 2.7 Hz as shown in Fig. 6 (a) and (b).

ϕ = Fmxw Fsw is defined where Fmxw is the maximum At the input frequency of 2.7 Hz for the friction coefficient of

0.2 and 4 Hz for the friction coefficient of 0.3, the dynamic

dynamic wheel load and Fsw is the static wheel load, and a force factors increase to values of 1.31 and 1.34 from 1.10 and

1.11 at 2 Hz respectively. Correspondingly, the wheel-

wheel-unloading factor ψ = F miw F sw where Fmiw is the

unloading factors decrease from 0.89 and 0.88 at 2 Hz to 0.69

minimum dynamic wheel load. The relationships between and 0.65 at 2.7 Hz and 4 Hz respectively. After these two

these two factors and the input frequencies at the wedge friction frequencies, the dynamic force factors and the wheel-unloading

coefficients of 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3 are shown in Fig. 6 (a) and (b) factors have a small decrease and then increase respectively

respectively. until 6 Hz. After 6 Hz, they increase and decrease linearly

respectively as the track input frequency increases.

2.0

1.9

It can be also seen that after 4 Hz, the larger friction

1.8

Friction Coe. of 0.1 coefficients on wedge surfaces cause the larger dynamic wheel

1.7 Friction Coe. of 0.2 loads at higher frequency inputs. For example, the dynamic

Dynamic Force Factor

1.6

Friction Coe. of 0.3

force factors for the wedge friction coefficients of 0.1 and 0.3

1.5

are 1.17 and 1.29 at 6 Hz with the increase of 10.3%, and 1.40

1.4

and 1.60 at 10 Hz with the increase of 14.3% respectively.

1.3

1.2 6. CONCLUSIONS

1.1 Comprehensive wagon-track modelling for simulating the

1.0 dynamic behaviors of three-piece bogie suspension system with

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Input Frequncy (Hz)

friction wedges has been presented. The effect of wedge

friction conditions and wedge mass on the dynamic wheel load

(a) Dynamic Force Factor has been investigated for a geometry irregularity with short

1.0 wavelength.

0.9

0.7 friction coefficient (e.g. 0.1) on the wedge contact surfaces and

Wheel-Unloading Factor

0.5

input frequency is close to the vertical natural frequency (2.3

Friction Coe. of 0.1

Hz) of bogie suspension, large dynamic wheel loads are

Friction Coe. of 0.3 generated, with the dynamic force factor being near 2.0 with

0.3

wheel lift off. However, with larger friction coefficients (e.g.

0.2

0.2 and 0.3) on the wedge surface, suspension resonance is

0.1 restricted, leading to smaller dynamic wheel loads. At track

0.0 input frequencies higher than resonance, the dynamic wheel

2 3 4 5 6

Input Frequency (Hz)

7 8 9 10

load increases proportionally with the track input frequency.

Larger friction coefficients on wedge surfaces also result in

(b) Wheel-Unloading Factor larger dynamic wheel loads at higher frequency inputs.

Fig. 6 Relationships between Dynamic Wheel Load and Track

Input Frequency ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

From Fig. 6 (a) and (b), it can be seen that for the friction The Centre for Railway Engineering at Central Queensland

coefficient of 0.1 on the wedge surfaces, a maximum value for University, Australia financially supported this research – bogie

the dynamic force factor is reached and the minimum value suspension dynamics.

down to the zero (wheel lifting off rail) for the wheel-unloading

factor occurs at a frequency of 2.3 Hz. This frequency is equal REFERENCES

to the vertical natural frequency of the suspension. For the input [1] Jenkins, H.H., Stephenson, J.E., Clayton, G.A., Morland,

frequencies greater than 2.3 Hz, the dynamic force factor G.W., Lyon, D. The effect of track and vehicle parameters on

reduces, and the wheel-unloading factor increases significantly. wheel/rail vertical dynamic forces. Railway Engineering

However, after 6 Hz, they increase and decrease linearly Journal, 1974, 3(1), 2-16.

respectively as the track input frequency increases. The value [2] Newton, S.G., Clark, R.A. An investigation into the

of 1.16 for the dynamic force factor at 6 Hz, for example, dynamic effects on the track of wheelflats on railway wagon. J.

increases to 1.40 at 10 Hz with an increase of about 20%. Mech. Engng. Sci., 1979, 21(4), 287-297.

[3] Clark, R.A., Dean, P.A., Elkins, J.A., Newton S.G. An

For the wedge friction coefficients of 0.2 and 0.3, as investigation into the dynamic effects of railway vehicles

discussed in above section, the friction on wedge surfaces can running on corrugated rails. J. Mech. Engng Sci. 1982, 24(2),

restrict the resonance of suspension, making the dynamic force 65-76.

factor and the wheel-unloading factor smaller in the range of

[4] Cai, A., Raymond, G.P. Modelling the dynamic response [15] Sun, Y.Q., Dhanasekar, M., Roach, D., 2003. Wheel – rail

of railway track to wheel/rail impact loading. Structural interaction responses due to track geometry irregularities. Proc.

Engineering and Mechanics, 1994, 2(1), 95-112. of Railway Engineering - 2003, UK.

[5] Dong, R.G., Sankar, S., Dukkipati, R.V. A finite element [16] Sun, Y.Q., Dhanasekar, M., Roach, D., 2002. A 3D model

model of railway track and its application to the wheel flat for the lateral and vertical dynamics of wagon – track system.

problem. Proc Instn Mech Engrs, 1994, 208, 61-72. Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs, Vol. 217, Part F, 31-45.

[6] Dahlberg, T. Vertical dynamic train/track interaction – [17] Sun, Y.Q., Dhanasekar, M., 2002. Influence of the railway

verifying a theoretical model by full-scale experiments. track parameters to the vertical and lateral impact. Proc. of

Vehicle System Dynamics Supplement, 1995, 24, 45-57. Conference on Railway Engineering, Wollongong, Australia,

[7] Cai, A., Raymond, G.P. Theoretical model for dynamic 373-382.

wheel/rail and track interaction. Proc. of International Wheelset [18] Sun, Y.Q., Dhanasekar, M., 2002. A dynamic model for

Congress, Sydney, Australia, 1992, 127-131. the vertical interaction of the rail track and wagon system.

[8] Zhai, W., Sun, X. A detailed model for investigating International Journal of Solids and Structures, Vol. 39, 1337-

interaction between railway vehicle and track. Proceeding of 1359.

13th IAVSD Symposium, 1993, 603-614. [19] Gardner, J. F. and Cusumano, J. P., 1997. Dynamic Models

[9] Ripke, B., Knothe, K. Simulation of high frequency of Friction Wedge Dampers. Proc. of ASME/IEEE Joint

wagon-track interactions. Vehicle System Dynamics Railroad Conference. Boston, MA, pp. 65-69.

Supplement, 1995, 24, 72-85. [20] Harder, R. F., 2001. Dynamic Modelling and Simulation of

[10] Fermer, M., Nielsen, J.C.O. Vertical interaction between Three-Piece Freight Vehicle Suspensions with Non-linear

train and track with soft and stiff railpads – full-scale Friction Behaviour Using ADAMS/RAIL. Proc. of

experiments and theory. Proc Instn Mech Engrs, 1995, 209, 39- ASME/IEEE Joint Railroad Conference, pp. 185-191.

47. [21] Frohling, R. D., Howard, M. A. and Kayser, C. R., 1996.

[11] Sauvage, G., Pascal, J. P. Solution of multiple wheel and Experimental and Theoretical Investigation Load Sensitive

rail contact dynamic problem. Vehicle System Dynamics, 1990, Damping in Three-Piece Freight Car Bogies. Proc. of An IHHA

19, 257-272. Conference on Freight Car Truck/Bogie, Montreal, Canada, pp.

[12] McClanachan, M.J. Investigation of extreme wagon 2.3-2.10

dynamics in Central Queensland coal trains. Master Thesis, [22] Berghuvud A. and Stensson A., 2001. Consequence of

1999, Central Queensland University, Australia. Nonlinear Characteristics of a Secondary Suspension in a

[13] Frohling, R. D., Howard, M. A. and Kayser, C. R., 1996. Three-piece Freight Car Bogie. Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol.

Experimental and Theoretical Investigation Load Sensitive 36, No. 1, pp. 37-55

Damping in Three-Piece Freight Car Bogies. Proc. of An IHHA [23] Kaiser, A. B., Cusumano, J. P. and Gardner J. F., 2002.

Conference on Freight Car Truck/Bogie, Montreal, Canada, pp. Modelling and Dynamics of Friction Wedge Dampers in

2.3-2.10 Railroad Freight Trucks. Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. 38,

[14] Sun, Y.Q., Dhanasekar, M., Roach, D., 2004. Effect of No. 1, pp. 55-82

track geometry irregularities on wheel – rail impact forces.

Proc. of Conference on Railway Engineering, Darwin,

Australia, 03.1-03.7.

- 67-H-0112Încărcat deVinod Rushinath
- The fundamental structureÎncărcat deDhrubajyoti deb
- Static and dynamic analysis of space frameÎncărcat deanand007krishnan
- Screen Amplite Testing-metsoÎncărcat dePRASHANTH
- Stiffness of engine mountÎncărcat denkrish21856
- 1234Încărcat deFrancisco Andres Muñoz
- vehicle dynamics question bankÎncărcat deJagadesh Abbu
- 1. SNI 2013 Pekerjaan PersiapanÎncărcat deevan
- Air element suspensionÎncărcat decasarrubiasv
- 3d IR30 Slides 36-45Încărcat deRomero Andrade
- Http Www.diracdelta.coÎncărcat dearun.nemo
- QP1701.docxÎncărcat deRusyaidi Umar
- Release Notes of STRUDS 2008Încărcat desatoni12
- ZE210264270.pdfÎncărcat deAJER JOURNAL
- BanitalebiDehkordi Uqac 0862N 10041Încărcat deAvinashRai
- Solidworks Simulation ProjectÎncărcat deAlper Kutluyuva
- Vibration Measurements and Analysis of Agricultural TractorsÎncărcat deSaurabh Jain
- 4130003_ftpÎncărcat deVarun Chaitanya
- damage6Încărcat demanindarkumar
- Equivalent Stiffness and InertiaÎncărcat dedvarsastry
- 2_CHUTTER_1Încărcat dewahid-s
- 16ECEE inubush E-3-3.docxÎncărcat deeder
- Statics and Dynamics Structural AnalysisÎncărcat deVaibhav Jadhav
- AE_ME_6311_HW_3Încărcat deumangdighe
- 67-H-0112_3Încărcat deVinod Rushinath
- 316539093-cypecad-vs-etabs-en1.pdfÎncărcat deWalner Santos
- Effect of Number of Storeys to Natyral Time PeriodeÎncărcat deDemçe Florjan
- 61199Încărcat deMetin Mehel
- Course Outline ENME599 2016FÎncărcat deNorman
- 2007 Ansys Conf Gromala MueÎncărcat deRaja Venkatesh

- Bt Eco4 Ebi DriveÎncărcat desorinarsene
- The Future of Rail-IEA.jan.2019Încărcat desorinarsene
- Uic High Speed 2018 Ph08 WebÎncărcat deSonny Andalis
- Study on the Aerodynamic ForceÎncărcat desorinarsene
- 18693Încărcat deRenato Benintendi
- Wind and BeyondÎncărcat deSuryaKaundinyaOruganti
- Dinamica vehiculelor feroviare_0001Încărcat deponticul
- Anderson ~ Fundamentals of Aerodynamics .pdfÎncărcat desorinarsene
- Baker_2014a_Aeronautical_Journal.pdfÎncărcat desorinarsene
- BT ECO4 EcoEfficientÎncărcat desorinarsene
- BT ECO4 AeroEfficientÎncărcat desorinarsene
- BT ECO4 OverviewÎncărcat desorinarsene
- tbemia07.pdfÎncărcat deRomina Ilina-Posea
- CursÎncărcat derazvy_med
- Reference List Locomotives a19100 v600 b320 x 7600englÎncărcat desorinarsene

- Informal MarketingÎncărcat deTawsif Ahmed Khan
- Murphy IGuardÎncărcat deJorge Muñoz Arrobo
- Joe Mccomb ResumeÎncărcat decallertimes
- List of NGO HyderabadÎncărcat deAhsan Rizwan
- Scad AÎncărcat dedarkforces
- Marine Safety Management SystemÎncărcat defilipi_vc
- Risk Management.docxÎncărcat devaasto2003
- ESP.docÎncărcat deSantanu Mandal
- mooe procurement budgetÎncărcat deEdwin Masicat
- America s Civil War - May 2016Încărcat des.roland
- Recca Annual Review 2017 Final VersionÎncărcat deArif
- Digital Marketing Plan Template Smart InsightsÎncărcat deTuan Do
- Darrell DiZoglio, Certified Professional Resume Writer, Dallas, Texas 2014Încărcat deDarrell DiZoglio
- FINAL Subnational Competitiveness and National Performance Analysis and Simulation for IndonesiaÎncărcat deVictor Firmana
- DVR 4 CANALES CPCAM MDR672MÎncărcat deTecnoSmart
- Palawan Electric CooperativeÎncărcat deDemz Palmeras
- Online Complaint Management SystemÎncărcat deamol Akolkar ( amolpc86)
- TMMi OverviewÎncărcat deEdgar Valladares
- == CV ==Încărcat deHamza Shabbri
- internationalÎncărcat deMuhammad Faiz Siman
- Compare and Contrast Essay: A Traditional Class vs An Online ClassÎncărcat dePatrick Chau
- Walt DisneyÎncărcat deGhozi Naufal Ahmadi
- EPA USA Regulations and Data on ChemicalsÎncărcat deZara Thomas
- octaveÎncărcat deDan Snzz
- Split ValuationÎncărcat detokyo-don
- Windows XP Keyboard Shortcuts TrifoldÎncărcat deChris Todd
- Competitiv Advantage Fedex an MyselfÎncărcat deFerry Styawan
- Research on Supply Chain Performance Evaluation Based on DEA AHP ModelÎncărcat demsainz1934
- Mje 13005Încărcat deanon_455450145
- FS-25A_ManualÎncărcat deWenceslao Moreno Guerrero

## Mult mai mult decât documente.

Descoperiți tot ce are Scribd de oferit, inclusiv cărți și cărți audio de la editori majori.

Anulați oricând.