Train Coupler Longitudinal Effect 13

This article was downloaded by: [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP]
On: 01 September 2014, At: 05:00

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Vehicle System Dynamics: International

Journal of Vehicle Mechanics and
Mobility
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nvsd20
Coupler rotation behaviour and its

effect on heavy haul trains
a
Z.Q. Xu , W.H. Ma , Q. Wu & S.H. Luo
Traction Power State Key Laboratory, Southwest Jiaotong

University, Chengdu, Sichuan, People's Republic of China
Published online: 26 Sep 2013.
To cite this article: Z.Q. Xu, W.H. Ma, Q. Wu & S.H. Luo (2013) Coupler rotation behaviour and its
effect on heavy haul trains, Vehicle System Dynamics: International Journal of Vehicle Mechanics
and Mobility, 51:12, 1818-1838, DOI: 10.1080/00423114.2013.834369
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00423114.2013.834369
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
Vehicle System Dynamics, 2013

Vol. 51, No. 12, 18181838, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00423114.2013.834369
Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014
Coupler rotation behaviour and its effect on heavy haul trains

Z.Q. Xu , W.H. Ma, Q. Wu and S.H. Luo
Traction Power State Key Laboratory, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan,
Peoples Republic of China
(Received 5 August 2013; accepted 8 August 2013 )
When a locomotive coupler rotates at an angle, the lateral component of the coupler force has an
adverse effect on the locomotives safety, particularly in heavy haul trains. In this paper, a model of
a head-mid configuration, a 20,000-t heavy haul train is developed to analyse the rotation behaviour
of the locomotives coupler system and its effect on the dynamic behaviour of such a trains middle
locomotive when operating on tangent and curved tracks. The train model includes detailed coupler
and draft gear with which to consider the hysteretic characteristics of the rubber draft gear model,
the friction characteristics of the coupler knuckles, and the alignment-control characteristics of the
coupler shoulder. The results indicate that the couplers rotation behaviour differs between the tangent
and curved tracks, significantly affecting the locomotives running performance under the braking
condition. A larger coupler rotation angle generates a larger lateral component, which increases the
wheelsets lateral force and the derailment coefficient. Decreasing the maximum coupler free angle can
improve the locomotives operational performance and safety. Based on these results, the recommended
maximum coupler free angle is 4 .
Keywords: heavy haul train; coupler and draft gear package; hysteretic characteristic; couplers;
maximum coupler free angle
1.
Introduction
Coupler and draft gear packages are important components of heavy haul trains because their
behaviour directly affects the safety of these trains. Due to the high cost of running tests,
most researchers have adopted computer simulations and developed mathematical models of
coupler and draft gear packages to carry out numerical studies on these systems.
The existing draft gear mathematical models can be categorised into three types: linear,
piecewise linear, and nonlinear hysteretic. The linear model simplifies the draft gear into a
linear spring and damper system,[13] which greatly improves the simulation efficiency. However, because of the conspicuous differences between an actual draft gear and its simplified
model when using linear characteristics, this model has rarely been used in research. Some
piecewise linear models have been applied to European side buffers.[4,5] To date, however, the
most accurate draft gear model is the nonlinear hysteretic model, which was proposed by Duncan [6] in 1989. Duncans nonlinear hysteretic model included a coupler slack, approximate
draft gear impedance characteristics, and rigid impact characteristics applied after the draft
gear loses its effectiveness. The model reflected the draft gears characteristics under certain
Corresponding
author. Email: ziqiang_x@yahoo.cn
2013 Taylor & Francis
Vehicle System Dynamics
1819
impact conditions, such as drop-weight tests and shunting operations. Cole [7] proposed a
nonlinear hysteretic model for friction draft gear that met the requirements for both impact
and normal conditions. He conducted many longitudinal train investigations using this model,
such as a wagon pitching analysis and train operation optimisation.[8,9] Nasr and Mohammandi [10] analysed the effect of train-brake delays based on Coles principle, and Diana
et al. [11] and Belforte et al. [12] adopted a train set dynamic simulator and analysed the
effect of nonlinear hysteretic draft gear on train safety operations.
Research on coupler modelling commenced with the use of a longitudinal dynamic train
model in which the coupler was simplified as a force element. The structural stiffness was then
regarded as the stiffness of the force element.[13,14] Several train derailment accidents have
occurred in recent years due to the rotation behaviour of couplers.[15,16] As a result, many
scholars have built coupler models to analyse coupler rotation behaviour and its implementation. The most common method involved calculating the coupler rotation angles and coupler
forces individually, the results of which were then applied to a train model. El-Sibie [17]
developed a coupler angle calculation procedure called the Coupler Angling Behaviour Simulator, applied the result to a dynamic train model, and investigated the trains safety on a
curved track. Cole et al. [18] calculated the coupler angles and lateral components of the
coupler forces and applied these lateral forces to the longitudinal dynamic train model. The
quasi-static lateral forces, quasi-static vertical forces, and quasi-static bogie lateral to vertical
ratio were obtained as part of his research. Luo et al. [19] and Ma et al. [20] constructed more
detailed coupler models in which the couplers structure and rotation limit were considered.
The couplers rotation behaviour and locomotive safety problems during braking were then
studied based on this model.
Based on these prior researches, this study establishes a hysteretic characteristic draft gear
model using experimental data. The loading/unloading curves and their switching mode are
also considered. Next, different loads are applied to the draft gear model to verify its accuracy.
The coupler structure and coupler shoulder alignment-control principle are considered in the
coupler model, and the contact surface in the coupler knuckle is also considered using the
Coulomb friction model. Finally, a head-mid configuration, 20,000-t train model is developed that considers the coupler, draft gear package, and locomotives with 72 degrees of
freedom (DOFs to study the coupler and draft gear package behaviours and their effect on the
locomotives. A maximum coupler free angle is recommended based on the simulation results.
2.
2.1.
Draft gear model

Draft gear test characteristics and mathematical model
The coupler systems include an NC390 draft gear, which is a rubber draft gear consisting of
several sheets of rubber (shown in Figure 1). The total height of the rubber parts is 194 mm,
and the followers are attached to both ends of the rubber draft gear.
A static loading test is conducted to obtain accurate impedance characteristics for the NC390
draft gear. The draft gear responses are shown in Figure 2.
The draft gear has nonlinear hysteretic characteristics, which means that there are margins
between the loading and unloading curves. This characteristic enables the draft gear to absorb
vibration energy. Based on the test data, the loading and unloading characteristics can be
described using two functions, fl (x) and fu (x).
The vehicle draft gear is installed and fixed on the front and rear followers. The front
follower compresses the draft gear when the coupler is subjected to compressive forces, and
the rear follower compresses the draft gear when the coupler is subjected to tensile forces.
Figure 1.
Z.Q. Xu et al.
Draft gear scheme.
4500
4000
3500
Impedance force (kN)
1820
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Draft gear stroke (mm)

Figure 2. Test results for the NC 390 draft gear.
Thus, the draft gear has identical compressive and tensile properties. Compared with Figure 2,
the slack between two coupler knuckles is also considered in the draft gear input function,
which means that the stroke of the draft gear increases by 5 mm (half of the coupler slack) on
each side. The final draft gear input functions can be obtained in this manner and are shown in
Figure 3. The compressive coupler force and compressive stroke of the draft gear are defined
as positive values, whereas the tensile coupler force and tensile stroke of the draft gear are
defined as negative values.
The draft gear hysteretic force is defined as
fhys = |fl (x) fu (x)|.
(1)
1821
5000
Impedance force (kN)
4000 Max impedance force
fl(x)
3000
2000
Coupler slack
(10mm)
1000
0
1000
fu(x)
2000
fu(x)
Pre-pressure
fl(x)
3000
4000
5000
50 40 30 20 10
10
20
30
40
50

Figure 3.
Draft gear input functions.
The stroke change rate of the draft gear, denoted by ev, is defined as the switching rate between
the loading and unloading functions. The smaller value of ev means that the switching speed
between the loading and unloading function is faster, and a value of 0.001 m/s is used in
the simulation. Specifically, the draft gear outputs a loading or unloading function when an
instantaneous speed |v| ev; but outputs a continuous function that changes with the stroke
when |v| ev. This function is shown in Figure 4.
The hysteretic force of the draft gear is defined as
fhys1 =
v
|fl (x) fu (x)|
ev
|v| ev.
(2)
Because the direction of the hysteretic force is opposite to the direction of motion, by introducing the sign function sign(v), the draft gear mathematical model can be expressed as
f (x) + | fl (x) fu (x)|sign(v)

if (|v| ev),
FC = F(x, v) =
(3)
v
f (x) +
| fl (x) fu (x)|sign(v) if (|v| < ev),
ev
where f (x) is equal to fl (x) when the draft gear is in the loading state and fu (x) when the draft
gear is in the unloading state.
F
linear smooth
procession
fu(x)
fl(x)
0
ev
Figure 4.
Linear and smooth criteria.
v
ev
1822
Z.Q. Xu et al.
To test and verify the draft gear mathematical model and its response characteristics, a
single-DOF longitudinal vibration model is developed to calculate the draft gears responses
under impact, static, and periodic loading conditions.
Figure 5 presents the draft gear response under the impact condition. The simulation state
is a 100-t mass block impacting a fixed body at speeds of 1 and 2 m/s. The results indicate
that the impact speed significantly affects the draft gear response. The actual force acting on
the draft gear reaches the maximum impedance force of 4445 kN when the impact speed is
2 m/s, whereas the comprehensive force is only 3000 kN when the impact speed is 1 m/s.
The switch, loading, and unloading characteristics can be clearly observed during the impact
simulation.
Figure 6 presents the draft gear response under the static loading condition. The maximum
compressive force is 4500 kN. When the draft gear is subjected to a compressive force, the
stroke soon exceeds 5 mm and a small vibration is generated as the draft gear overcomes the
pre-load. The entire response curve is smoother than that under the impact condition.
5000
Draft gear force (kN)
4000
1m/s
2m/s
3000
2000
1000
0
1000
2000
3000
50 40 30 20 10
10
20
30
40
50

Figure 5.
Impact condition.
5000
Draft gear comperssive force (kN)
2.2. Verification of the draft gear model
4000
Static
3000
2000
1000
0
1000
0
10
20
30
Figure 6.
Static loading condition.
40
50
1200
1100
1000
900
0.5Hz
1Hz
1.5Hz
800
700
28
Figure 7.
1823
1300
30
32
34
Different frequency periodic loading conditions.
5000
Static
1000kN
4000
2000kN
3000kN
3000
2000
1000
0
1000
0
Figure 8.
10
20
30
40
50
Comparison between static and periodic loading conditions.
Figure 7 presents the draft gear response to a 1000 kN periodic load at 0.5, 1, and 2 Hz.
The amplitude of the load is 300 kN. Loading cycles are generated due to the effect of the
periodic loads (also presented in [21]). The dimension of the loading cycle simultaneously
decreases with the increase in load frequency, indicating that the draft gear stroke switches
faster between the loading and unloading statuses under high-frequency loads.
Figure 8 presents a comparison between the static and periodic loading states. The loading
cycle of the draft gear switches between the loading and unloading curves under dynamic
compression, and the static result is consistent with the dynamic result.
3.
Coupler model
3.1. Coupling surface characteristics

Coupler knuckles were not considered in previous coupler studies. Scholars generally
simplified the coupler as a straight bar, and the relative motions of the two couplers were
1824
Z.Q. Xu et al.
neglected. In this study, the coupling surface between the two coupler knuckles is built using
the Coulomb friction model. The coupling surface has rotation and translation motions in the
direction of the z-axis. The coupler body can rotate around the y- and z-axes and translate in
the x-direction. The followers have longitudinal translation freedom.
Figure 9 presents the structure of the coupler and draft gear package model. The angle
between the car body and couplers centreline is called the coupler rotation angle. When the
coupler shoulder contacts the plunger casting, the angle between the two is called the maximum
coupler free angle.
3.2.
Coupler shoulder alignment control characteristic
A Type 102 coupler, commonly used in Chinese heavy haul locomotives, has a shoulder
alignment control function (shown in Figure 9(c)-A). When the coupler rotation angle reaches
the maximum coupler free angle, the plunger casting is in contact with the coupler shoulder.
The counterforce of the draft gear provides the aligning moment and constrains further rotation
of the coupler by balancing the overturning moment, which is generated from the longitudinal
(a)
Carbody
Coupling surfice
Vertical and lateral

Rotation characteristic
(b)
Front follower
Draf t gear
B
Coupler
(c)
Plunger casting
Knuckle
Knuckle pin
Rotation angle
Coupler pin
Coupler shoulder
Front follower
A
Figure 9.
Contact point
Friction characteristic
B
Structure of the coupler and draft gear models. (a) Side view, (b) vertical view and (c) detailed view.
compressive force. The aligning characteristic is expressed as
| | < free ,
0
Tre = FD Lsh sign( )
free | | max ,
( max sign( )) 108 Lsh | | > max .
1825
(4)
FD is the coupler compressive force, Tre is the coupler aligning torque, is the coupler
current rotation angle, free and max are the maximum coupler free angle and maximum
coupler structure angle, respectively, and Lsh is the distance between the coupler shoulder and
coupler pin.
3.3. Coupling surface friction model
Before the coupler reaches the profile limit, the coupling surface generates a friction force and
constrains the relative motion between the two coupler knuckles. The friction forces between
the couplers consist of the rotation friction force on the horizontal plane and the transition
friction force on the vertical plane. The principle of the Coulomb model used for the friction
surfaces is expressed by Equation (5):
|vr | = 0,
F =0
f
vr
|vr | < vf ,
Ff = Ff = FD
(5)
vf
FD sign(vr ) |vr | vf ,
where Ff is the friction force on the coupling surface, vr is the relative speed of the contact
point, vf is the critical velocity in the static state, and is the friction coefficient (shown in
Figure 9(c)-B). The established coupler and draft gear dynamic model is shown in Figure 10.
3.4. Profile limit of the coupling surface
The coupler head profile can constrain the relative motion between the two coupler knuckles.
Therefore, nonlinear stop force elements must be constructed. According to the structure of
the coupler profile, the maximum horizontal angle is 10.7 and the maximum vertical angle is
3.7 . The characteristics of the stop force element along the horizontal and vertical directions
Figure 10.
Coupler and draft gear dynamic model.
1826
Z.Q. Xu et al.
are expressed in Equation (6):

Fre =
0,
| | < re ,
8
( max sign( )) 10 , | | re ,
(6)
where Fre is the stop force, is the relative angle of the coupling surface, and re is the
constraint angle.
4. Train model
4.1.
Locomotive model
The axle load of a locomotive with a 2C0 axle type is 33 t. The primary suspension is modelled
using a vertical spring, vertical damper, and journal box pull rod. The secondary suspension
consists of three rubber bearings, one lateral damper, and two yaw dampers. The drive unit
uses a nose suspension, which consists of an AC motor and gear system. The car body and
bogie are connected using a float centre pin, and the locomotive uses a tread brake.
The single locomotive dynamic model consists of one car body, two bogies, six wheelsets, six
motors, and six motor rods. These 21 rigid bodies are connected to the primary and secondary
suspensions, and the locomotive dynamic model has 72 DOFs (Figure 11). The simulated
locomotive uses standard-gauge railway bogies, the gauge distance of which is 1435 mm. The
wheel tread is a JM3 wear-type tread, and the rail weighs 75 kg per meter. The locomotive can
provide 500 kN of force for dynamic braking. Key parameters of the locomotive and coupler
are listed in Table 1.
Figure 11.
Table 1.
Parameter
Locomotive dynamic model.

Key parameters of the locomotive and coupler.
Value
Length between the front and rear coupler pins (Lc )

20.9
13.3 m
Bogie spacing (Lb )
Lateral stiffness of the primary suspension
0.69 kN/mm
Lateral stiffness of the secondary suspension
0.4 kN/mm
Composed lateral stiffness of the bogie (K)
0.93 kN/mm
Parameter
Value
Secondary stop free clearance

Secondary stop maximum clearance
Maximum coupler free angle
Length of coupler (LC )
Length between the coupler pin and
plunger casting
35 mm
50 mm
6
711 mm
135 mm
4.2.
1827
Train model
The train has the head-mid configuration shown in Figure 12, with locomotives at the head
and middle of the train. The head locomotive connects wagon A with the first coupler (C_1).
The locomotive has 72 DOFs, as presented in Chapter 4.1. One hundred dummy wagons are
placed between wagons A and B. Next, the second and third couplers (C_2 and C_3) connect
wagon B, the middle locomotive, and wagon C. Another 100 dummy wagons are placed behind
wagon C. In the train model, wagons A, B, and C, which are adjacent to the locomotive, have
66 DOFs (the wagon is a traditional Chinese 80-t wagon with two three-piece bogies). If a
wagon has only one DOF, its body cannot yaw or pitch, which decreases the coupler rotation
angle. The wagons are divided into three wagons as one group, and these three wagons are
connected together by traction rods, so there is no slack in the group. A spring/damper force
element with hysteretic characteristics and coupler slack is used to connect each wagon group.
The use of a draw bar can reduce in-train impact forces.
Tangent and curved tracks are used in the simulation. The curved track is an S-shaped
track containing two reverse circular curves with radii of 300 m. The length of each circular
curved track is 100 m, and the length of the transition curve is 60 m, as shown in Figure 13.
Figure 12.
Head-mid configuration of the train model.
Transation curve
(60 m)
Straight line
Circular curve track
(100 m)
Transation curve
(60 m)
Straight line
(50 m)
Transation curve
(60 m)
Circular curve track

(100 m)
Straight line
Transation curve
(60 m)
Figure 13.
S-shaped track geometry.
1828
Z.Q. Xu et al.
The elevation of the track is set at 120 mm. During calculations, the speed of the train is set
to 60 km/h and German track irregularities are used.[21]
5.
Simulation results
Figure 14 presents the compressive forces on the three locomotive couplers. When two
locomotives begin dynamic braking, the braking wave of the head locomotive is delivered
to the back end. Longitudinal in-train impact forces have little effect on the first coupler, the
force of which increases from 0 to 500 kN and then remains stable at 500 kN, which is almost
equal to the braking force. The next two couplers connected to locomotive B, which is located
in the middle of the train, suffer larger in-train impact forces. The coupler forces present
periodic sinusoidal forms. The maximum forces of the second and third couplers are 200 and
650 kN, respectively. Therefore, longitudinal in-train forces increase the coupler forces. At the
same time, a distinct disturbance can be observed when the coupler forces just overcome the
pre-load force of the draft gear.
Figure 15 illustrates that the rotation angle of the first coupler is between 1 , which does
not reach the maximum coupler free angle. The third coupler bears a maximum compressive
force, and its rotation angle reaches the maximum coupler free angle of 6 . The rotation
behaviour of the third coupler drives the locomotive and causes a small rotation of the second
coupler. The rotations of the second and third couplers change periodically with the coupler
compressive force increase.
Figure 16 presents the relative horizontal rotation angle of the couplers on the coupling
surface. These angles have little effect on the coupler rotation behaviour. The first and third
couplers have very small relative rotation angles because friction forces on the contact surface
constrain the rotation of the couplers. The second coupler rotates at certain relative angles
when the coupler force changes from a positive to negative value.
Figure 17 presents the relative vertical displacement of the couplers on the coupling surface.
All three couplers experience vertical disturbances at the beginning, but only the second coupler
also experiences disturbances when the coupler force changes from a positive to negative value.
750
C_1
C_2
C_3
500
Coupler force (kN)
5.1. Tangent track
250
-250
0
Figure 14.
Coupler force.
10
20
30
Time (s)
40
50
60
1829
Coupler rotation angle (de)
C_1
C_2
C_3
6
0
Figure 15.
10
20
30
Time (s)
40
50
0.10
C_1
C_2
C_3
0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0
Figure 16.
60
Coupler rotation angle.
Relative horizontal rotation angle (de)
10
20
30
Time (s)
40
50
60
Relative horizontal rotation.
Figures 14 and 15 illustrate that when the coupler fails to rotate to the maximum coupler free
angle when subjected to a 500 kN compressive force. The coupler rotates to the maximum
free angle when the coupler compressive force reaches 650 kN. From the structure of the
locomotive, the primary and secondary suspensions provide the lateral force and balance the
lateral component generated at the coupler angle. If the lateral component force is smaller
than the suspension lateral force, then the coupler can meet the dynamic stable state at a
small angle. If the lateral component force is larger than the suspension lateral force, then
the coupler rotates to the maximum free angle. At this time, the coupler shoulder alignment
control characteristic controls the coupler rotation behaviour.
The car body stable mechanism can be obtained though structural analysis, as shown in
Figure 18. It is assumed that the car body rotates clockwise under compressive coupler forces.
The yaw angle of the car body is (ignoring the lateral displacement of the car body). K is
the lateral stiffness of the bogie, and F1 and F2 are the lateral forces provided by the front and
rear bogies, respectively. Ffy and Fry are the lateral component forces of the front and rear
couplers, respectively, and is the angle between the coupler and car body. Lb and Lc are the
1830
Z.Q. Xu et al.
Relative vertical displacement (mm)
30
C_1
C_2
C_3
20
10
0
10
20
30
0
10
Figure 17.
Relative vertical displacement.
Figure 18.
Car body stable mechanisms.
20
30
Time (s)
40
50
60
bogie spacing and distance between the front and rear coupler pins, respectively, and FC and
FD are the rear coupler and car body stable forces, respectively.
If the entire system is stable, the functions can be obtained using the principle of theoretical
mechanics:
Fry Ffy + F1 F2 = 0,
1
1
Lc (Ffy + Fry ) Lb (F1 + F2 ) = 0.
2
2
(7)
The forces that act on the coupler pin meet the following conditions:
FD = Fry sin + Fc cos ,

Fc sin = Fry
cos .
(8)

is the reverse force of the Fry value provided by the car body. According to the above
Fry
formulas, when the secondary stop clearance is H,
2Lb KH
(sin + cos cot ),
Lc (1 + Ffy /Fry )

1 Lc sin
= arcsin
+ .
2 LCG
FD = Fry (sin + cos cot ) =

where
(9)
(10)
Based on the locomotives structural parameters, the quasi-static car body stable force can be
calculated as 610 kN. Figure 19 presents the coupler compressive force and rotation angle of
1831
700
Coupler force (kN)
400
-2
300
200
-4
rotation angle
100
0
-6
100
0
Figure 19.
10
15
Time (s)
20
25
30
Simulation result of the car bodys aligning ability.
the third coupler and indicates that the car body alignment force obtained from the simulation
is 560 kN (only a small difference is observed between FD and FC ). The simulation result has
a deviation of only 9% compared with the quasi-static mathematical result.
5.2.
Curved track
Figure 20 presents the compressive force of three locomotive couplers on the curved track.
The maximum coupler compressive force of 660 kN occurs at the third coupler. Compared
with those on the tangent track, the compressive forces are almost the same, which indicates
that the coupler angle and track curvature have little effect on the longitudinal in-train forces.
Figure 21 presents the coupler rotation angle on the curved track. The rotation angles of the
first and second couplers reach 4 and 6 , respectively, when the locomotive is negotiating the
transition curve. The angles decrease to 2.1 when the locomotive is negotiating the circular
curved track due to the track and locomotive structure. Based on the equations in,[18] the
rotation angle should be 2.15 , which is almost the same as that given by the simulation. The
800
600
Coupler force (kN)
Coupler force
500
600
400
200
0
C_1
C_2
C_3
200
400
0
Figure 20.
Coupler force.
10
20
30
Time (s)
40
50
60
1832
Z.Q. Xu et al.
8
straight line
S-type curve track
straight line
C_1
C_2
C_3
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
0
Figure 21.
10
20
30
Time (s)
40
50
60
Coupler rotation angle.
third coupler is subjected to the largest compressive force, which cannot be offset by the car
body, so its rotation angle is larger than those of the other two couplers. At this point, the car
body contacts the secondary stop and the coupler angle has not yet reached the maximum free
angle but is stable below 6 due to the effect of the secondary stop. After running out of the
curve, the train enters the tangent track and the couplers behaviour is similar to that shown
in Figure 16. Whether the curve is left or right does not affect the value of rotation angle;
however, the direction of curve only affects the rotation direction of coupler.
Figure 22 presents the relative horizontal rotation angle of the couplers on the curved track.
The tracks curvature leads to the relative rotation of the coupler, but this value is small under
compressive forces (the value is approximately 0.2 ). The relative rotation of the second
coupler is larger when the coupler force changes between the positive and negative values.
The relative vertical displacement of the couplers, shown in Figure 23, is small compared with
that experienced on the tangent track.
1.0
Relative horizontal rotation angle (de)
C_1
C_2
C_3
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.4
0
10
20
30
Time (s)
Figure 22.
Relative horizontal rotation.
40
50
60
Relative vertical displacement (mm)
C_1
C_2
C_3
20
10
0
10
20
30
0
Figure 23.
6.
10
20
30
Time (s)
40
50
60
Relative vertical rotation.
Effect of coupler behaviour on the middle locomotive
Three main evaluation standards are considered to evaluate the effect of coupler behaviour on a
locomotive: the wheelset lateral force, wheel derailment coefficient, and wheel load reduction
rate. The criteria follow the UIC 518 standards, and the limit value of the wheelset lateral force
is Y = 1.0(10 + 2Q0 /3) (kN), where Q0 is the vehicles axle load. For a locomotive with an
axle load of 33 t, the criterion limit value of the wheelset lateral force is 120 kN. The limit value
of the wheel derailment coefficient [(Y /Q)] = 0.8, where Y and Q are the lateral force and vertical force of the wheel, respectively, and the limit value of the wheel load reduction rate <0.6.
6.1. Tangent track
100
Rear stop
Front stop
Carbody displacement
80
10
0
10
60
20
40
30
40
20
50
0
60
0
10
20
30
Time (s)
Figure 24.
20
Secondary stop forces and car body displacement.
40
50
60
Carbody lateral displacement (mm)
Because the car body has the lateral displacement shown in Figure 24 on a tangent track, the
coupler angle is less than the maximum free angle of 6 under a large compressive force. The
Secondary stop force (kN)
30
1833
Z.Q. Xu et al.
car body contacts the secondary stop under the effect of the rotation and lateral motion. A
lateral force is generated by the secondary stop that constrains the rotation of the coupler. Only
the rear secondary stop generates lateral force, which means that the car body contacts only
the rear secondary stop. The displacement direction and car bodys rear side rotation direction
are on the same side because the rear coupler force is much larger than the front coupler force.
Figures 2527 illustrates that the coupler rotation behaviour significantly affects the locomotive dynamic performance on the tangent track. Individually, the wheelset lateral force
increases significantly with the increase in the third couplers rotation angle, particularly on
the rear bogies wheelsets. The maximum value is 92 kN on the sixth wheelset, and the increase
in the lateral force is provided by the stop lateral counter force and lateral component of the
coupler compressive force. The derailment coefficient exhibits the same trend as the wheelset
lateral force increases. The wheel load reduction rate also increases but is not distinct in the
front bogie, whereas that in the rear bogie wheelset is obvious. The maximum values of the
derailment coefficient and wheel load reduction rate are 0.38 and 0.4, respectively, both of
which occur on the sixth wheelset.
Wheelset lateral force (kN)
25
25
50
W_1
W_3
W_4
W_6
75
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
40
50
60
Time (s)
Figure 25. Wheelset lateral force.
0.1
0.0
Derailment coefficient
1834
0.1
0.2
W_1
W_3
W_4
W_6
0.3
0.4
0
10
20
30
Time (s)
Figure 26.
Derailment coefficient.
0.4
W_1
W_3
W_4
W_6
Wheel load reduction rate
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0
10
20
30
Time (s)
40
50
60
Figure 27. Wheel load reduction rate.
6.2.
Curved track
Figures 2830 present the dynamic evaluation indices of the wheelsets. The maximum value
always occurs when the train is running over the transition curve. In addition, the evaluation
values are larger than those on the tangent track when the train is negotiating a curve.
Generally, maximum dynamic evaluation indices occur in the first wheelset (or steering
wheelset) when negotiating a curve. However, under the dynamic braking condition, the lateral
component of the coupler compressive force affects the locomotive performance, particularly
on the sixth wheelset. The maximum values of the sixth wheelset are very close to those
of the first wheelset for the wheelset lateral force, derailment coefficient, and wheel load
reduction rate. When comparing the dynamic results of the sixth wheelset under idle and
braking conditions (Figure 31), the sixth wheelset lateral force and derailment coefficient
clearly increase. The wheel load reduction rate also displays a slight increase. When the coupler
100
W_1
W_3
W_4
W_6
80
Wheelset lateral force (kN)
1835
60
40
20
0
20
40
60
80
100
0
Figure 28. Wheelset lateral force.
10
20
30
Time (s)
40
50
60
1836
Z.Q. Xu et al.
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
W_1
W_3
W_4
W_6
0.5
0.6
0.7
0
Figure 29.
10
20
30
Time (s)
40
50
60
Derailment coefficient.
0.6
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.2
W_1
W_3
W_4
W_6
0.4
0.6
0
10
20
30
Time (s)
40
50
60
Figure 30. Wheel load reduction rate.
compressive force increases continuously, the dynamic performance of the sixth wheelset
exceeds that of the first wheelset.
6.3. Effect of the maximum coupler free angle
Figure 32(a) and 32(b) illustrates the effect of the maximum coupler free angle on the locomotives performance on the tangent and curved tracks, respectively. The figure indicates
that the maximum coupler free angle has a significant effect on the wheelsets lateral force
and derailment coefficient. The wheelsets lateral force and derailment coefficient are smaller
for smaller values of the maximum coupler free angle. The wheel load reduction rate of the
locomotive exhibits the same trend but in a less discernible manner.
In conclusion, reducing the maximum coupler free angle can improve the locomotives
safety, but the coupler requires a natural angle when the train is negotiating a curve. For
example, the natural angle should be 2.1 when negotiating a curve with a radius of 300 m. In
1837
Wheelset lateral force (105N)

1.0
0.6
Value (the 6
0.4
0.2
0.0
Idle condition
Figure 31.
Braking condition
Evaluation criteria under different conditions.
(b)
(a)
1.0
0.6
(105N)
Wheelset lateral force

Wheel Load Reduction Rate
Wheelset lateral force (105N)

0.8
Value (curve track)
0.5
Value (tangent track)
th
wheelset)
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
3
Coupler maximum rotation angle (de)
Tangent track
Coupler maximum rotation angle (de)
Curved track
Figure 32. Effect of the maximum coupler free angle on locomotive performance (the study object is the sixth
wheelset of the middle locomotive). (a) Tangent track and (b) curved track.
a shunting operation, this angle can reach 4 . A natural angle is also required when decoupling
couplers. In fact, a free angle of 4 is available for the same coupler types in North America.[22]
Therefore, it is important that the maximum free angle is not too small. According to above
analysis, the recommended maximum coupler free angle is 4 .
7.
Conclusions
This paper focuses on rotation behaviour and its effect on locomotive couplers in heavy haul
trains. The performed simulations indicate that in-train impact forces can increase the coupler
force of middle locomotive couplers, which leads to varying performances among middle and
head couplers. As a result, the dynamic performance of a middle locomotive is worse than
that of a head locomotive.
1838
Z.Q. Xu et al.
Compared with those on a tangent track, coupler angles are much larger on a curved track,
but the performance of a locomotive remains the same. Decreasing a couplers maximum
free angle can reduce the lateral component of the coupler force, and the couplers shoulder
aligning force can also offset some of the coupler force. The performance of a locomotive
and the running safety of a train can be improved significantly by decreasing in the couplers
maximum free angle.
Based on calculations of coupler natural angles on a curved track and the maximum free
angle simulation results obtained in this study, a maximum free angle of 4 is recommended.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful for the grants provided by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51005190)
and the Fok Ying Tung Education Foundation (122014).
References
[1] Cruber P, Bayoumi M. Suboptimal control strategies for multi-locomotive powered trains. Trans Autom Control.
1982;27:536546.
[2] Geike T. Understanding high coupler forces at metro vehicles. Veh Syst Dyn. 2007;45:389396.
[3] Ansari M, Esmaizadeh E, Younesian D. Longitudinal dynamics of freight train. Int J Heavy Veh Syst.
2009;16:102131.
[4] Durali M, Shadmehri B. Nonlinear analysis of train derailment in severe braking. J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control.
2003;125:4853.
[5] Pugi L, Fioravanti D, Rindi A. Modeling the longitudinal dynamics of long freight trains during the braking
phase. 12th IFTOMM World Congress, Besancon; 2007, p.16.
[6] Duncan IB, Webb PA. The longitudinal behaviour of heavy haul trains using remote locomotives. The Fourth
International Heavy Haul Railway Conference, Brisbane; 1989. p.587590.
[7] Cole C. Improvements to wagon connection modeling for longitudinal train simulation. Conference on Railway
Engineering, Rockhampton; 1998. p.187194.
[8] Cole C, McLeod T. Optimising train operation using simulation, fuzzy logic cruise control and evolutionary
algorithms. Proceedings of the fifth Asia Pacific Industrial Engineering and Management Systems Conference
(APIEMS), Godd Coast, Australia; 2004. p.116.
[9] Cole C, SunYQ. Simulated comparisons of wagon coupler systems in heavy haul trains. Int J Rail Rapid Transit.
2006;220:247256.
[10] Nasr A, Mohammandi S. The effects of train brake delay time on in-train forces. Int J Rail Rapid Transit.
2010;224:523534.
[11] Diana G, Belforte P, Belforte P, Melizi S, Sgroi F, Favo F. Numerical and experimental investigation of heavy
freight train dynamic. 2007 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition. Seattle,
Washington; 2007. p.110.
[12] Belforte P, Cheli F, Diana G, Melzi S. Numerical and experimental approach for the evaluation of severe
longitudinal dynamics of heavy freight trains. Veh Syst Dyn. 2008;46:937955.
[13] Nasr A, Mohammadi S. The effects of train brake delay time on in-train forces. Int J Rail Rapid Transit.
2007;221:523534.
[14] Iwnicki S. Handbook of railway vehicle dynamics. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2006.
[15] Canadian National. Railway investigation report of derailment. Rep. R02C0050.TSB Canada; 2002.
[16] Xu ZQ, Luo SH. Ma WH. Dynamics properties of 2B0 heavy haul locomotive based on longitudinal stress.
J Traffic Transp Eng. 2009;9:4953.
[17] El-Sibaie M. Recent advancements in buff and draft testing techniques. Fifth International Heavy Haul
Conference, Bejing; 1993. p.115119.
[18] Cole C, McClanachan M, Spiryagin M, Sun YQ. Wagon instability in long trains. Veh Syst Dyn. 2012;50:
303317.
[19] Luo SH, Feng QB, Yang JJ. Research on dynamics of the HXD2 heavy locomotive bearing longitudinal
compressive strength. Railw Locomotive Car. 2008;28:145149.
[20] Ma WH, Luo SH, Song RR. Coupler dynamic performance analysis of heavy haul locomotives. Veh Syst Dyn.
2012;3:119.
[21] Cheli F, Melzi S. Experimental characterization and modeling of a side buffer for freight trains. Int J Rail Rapid
Transit. 2010;224:535546.
[22] Chen D. Derailment risk due to coupler jack-knifing under longitudinal buff force. Int J Rail Rapid Transit.
2010;224:483490.

Train Coupler Longitudinal Effect 13

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Train Coupler Longitudinal Effect 13

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

This article was downloaded by: [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP]

On: 01 September 2014, At: 05:00

Vehicle System Dynamics: International

Coupler rotation behaviour and its

Z.Q. Xu , W.H. Ma , Q. Wu & S.H. Luo

Traction Power State Key Laboratory, Southwest Jiaotong

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Vehicle System Dynamics, 2013

Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014

Coupler rotation behaviour and its effect on heavy haul trains

author. Email: ziqiang_x@yahoo.cn

2013 Taylor & Francis

Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014

Vehicle System Dynamics

Draft gear model

Draft gear scheme.

Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014

Draft gear stroke (mm)

Vehicle System Dynamics

Impedance force (kN)

Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014

4000 Max impedance force

Draft gear stroke (mm)

Draft gear input functions.

f (x) + | fl (x) fu (x)|sign(v)

Linear and smooth criteria.

Draft gear force (kN)

Draft gear stroke (mm)

Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014

2.2. Verification of the draft gear model

Draft gear stroke (mm)

Static loading condition.

Draft gear comperssive force (kN)

Different frequency periodic loading conditions.

Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014

Vehicle System Dynamics

Comparison between static and periodic loading conditions.

3.1. Coupling surface characteristics

Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014

Coupler shoulder alignment control characteristic

Vertical and lateral

Vehicle System Dynamics

Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014

compressive force. The aligning characteristic is expressed as

( max sign( )) 108 Lsh | | > max .

Coupler and draft gear dynamic model.

are expressed in Equation (6):

Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014

Locomotive dynamic model.

Length between the front and rear coupler pins (Lc )

Secondary stop free clearance

Vehicle System Dynamics

Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014

Head-mid configuration of the train model.

Circular curve track

S-shaped track geometry.

Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014

5.1. Tangent track

Vehicle System Dynamics

Coupler rotation angle (de)

Coupler rotation angle.

Relative horizontal rotation angle (de)

Downloaded by [Sistema Integrado de Bibliotecas USP] at 05:00 01 September 2014

Relative horizontal rotation.