RAIL WHEEL INTERACTION

- Nilmani, Prof. Track

RAIL WHEEL INTERACTION

RUNNING OF A RAILWAY VEHICLE OVER A LENGTH OF TRACK PRODUCES DYNAMIC FORCES BOTH ON THE VEHICLE AND ON THE TRACK THE INTERACTION AFFECTS BOTH TRACK AND RAILWAY VEHICLE RAIL WHEEL INTERACTION

EFFECT OF VEHICLE ON TRACK

LARGE DYNAMIC FORCES
DETERIORATION OF TRACK GEOMETRY TRACK COMPONENT WEAR & DAMAGE NOISE

EFFECT OF TRACK ON VEHICLE

SAFETY RIDING COMFORT COMPONENT WEAR & DAMAGE

NEED FOR UNDERSTANDING

REDUCE SAFETY RISK IMPROVE RIDING COMFORT REDUCE DETERIORATION OF TRACK GEOMETRY MINIMISE WEAR REDUCE NOISE AND VIBRATIONS IN VEHICLE

UNDERSTANDING RAIL WHEEL INTERACTION

DERAILMENT BY FLANGE MOUNTING WHEEL CONICITY AND GAUGE PLAY WHEEL OFF-LOADING CYCLIC TRACK IRREGULARITIESRESONANCE & DAMPING CRITICAL SPEED TRACK / VEHICLE TWIST

SELF CENTRALIZING CONED WHEELS

Sinusoidal motion of wheelset

SINUSOIDAL MOTION OF VEHICLE

PLAY BETWEEN WHEEL SET AND RAILS

G = Gw + 2 tf + Ws G is track gauge 1676 mm (BG) Gw is wheel gauge 1600 mm (BG) tf is flange thickness 28.5 mm new; 16mm worn out Ws is standard play = 19mm for new wheel = 44mm for worn out wheel

 Mean Position

Typical (Asymm etrical) Position Extreme Position

EFFECT OF PLAY
Lateral Displacement Y = a sin wt a p amplitude = W/2 = Play/2 Lateral velocity = aw cos wt Lateral Acceleration = -aw2 sin wt Max acc = -aw2 Angular Velocity w =

2 TR 2T f ! P

KLINGELS FORMULA (1883)

Wave Length P0 of a Single wheel P0

2T

rG 2K

G = Dynamic Gauge r = Dynamic Wheel Radius K = Conicity P0 E

1 K

;Frequency E K

CONCLUSIONS
increase instability For high speed K low 1 in 40 on high speed routes Worn out wheel K increases increasing instability For wheel set (MULTIPLE RIGID WHEELS)

With increase K, P0 reduces, f increases oscillations

l P ! PS 1  G

l Rigid wheel base

EFFECT OF PLAY

4T v acc ! a . 2 P

1 acc E 2 K P
As conicity increases Lateral Acceleration Increases acc E a E W/2 play As play increases Lateral Acceleration Increases

CONCLUSIONS EXCESSIVE OSCILLATIONS DUE TO

Slack Gauge Thin Flange Increased Play in bearing & Journal Excessive Lateral and Longitudinal Clearances

Increased Derailment Proneness

Wheel-set on Curve

THE PROCESS OF FLANGE CLIMBING DERAILMENT

SECTIONAL PLAN OF WHEEL FLANGE AT LEVEL OF FLANGE TO RAIL CONTACT

ZERO ANGULARITY (PLAN)

POSITIVE ANGULARITY (PLAN)

NEGATIVE ANGULARITY (PLAN)

EXAMPLES OF WHEEL SET COFIGURATION WITH POSITIVE ANGULARITY

ZERO ANGULARITY (ELEVATION)

POSITIVE ANGULARITY (ELEVATION)

NEGATIVE ANGULARITY (ELEVATION)

FORCES AT RAIL-WHEEL CONTACT AT MOMENT OF INCIPIENT DERAILMENT

FORCES AT RAIL-WHEEL CONTACT AT MOMENT OF INCIPIENT DERAILMENT

Resolving Along Flange Slope R= Q cos F + Y sin F. 1. For safety against derailment Derailing forces > stabling forces Y cos F + QR > Q sin F Substituting R from equation 1 Y cos F + Q (Q cos F + Y sin F) > Q sin F Y (cos F + Q sin F) > Q (sin F - Q cos F)

(sin F  Q cos F ) Y " (cos F  Q sin F ) Q

Nadals Equation (1908)

Y tan F  Q " Q 1  Q tan F
For Safety: LHS has to be small. RHS has to be large Y p Low Q p High Q p Low tan F p Large

FACTORS AFFECTING SAFETY

Flange Slope
F = 90 would indicate higher safety. However, with slight angularity, flange contact shifts to near tip. Safety depth for flange reduces resulting into increase in derailment proneness

FACTORS AFFECTING SAFETY

Flange Slope ANGULARITY is inherent feature of vehicle movement. If the vehicle has greater angularity, F should be less for greater safety depth of flange tip. However, there is a limit to it, as this criterion runs opposite to that indicated by Nadals formula.

FACTORS AFFECTING SAFETY

Flange slope On I.R., for most of rolling stock F = 68 12 (flange slope 2.5:1) For diesel and electric locos, the outer wheels encounter greater angularity for negotiation of curves and turnouts. For uniformity, same F adopted for all wheels. F kept as 700 on locos upto 110 kmph F kept as 600 on locos beyond 110 kmph

FACTORS AFFECTING SAFETY

Flange slope With wear F increases, but results in greater biting action, hence increase in Q.

FACTORS AFFECTING SAFETY

OTHER FACTORS INFLUENCING NADALS FORMULA
Q INCREASES WITH INCREASED ANGULARITY, E (PROF. HEUMANN)

E 0.0 0.02

Q 0.0 0.27

(acting upwards for positive angularity)

FACTORS AFFECTING SAFETY

OTHER FACTORS INFLUENCING NADALS FORMULA Greater eccentricity (positive angularity) increases derailment proneness as flange safety depth reduces. Persistent Angular Running As positive angularity increases derailment proneness, persistent angularity leads to greater chances of derailment.

FACTORS AFFECTING SAFETY

Not possible to know values of Q, Y, Q, E and eccentricity at instant of derailment. Calculations by NADALs formula not to be attempted. Qualitative analysis by studying magnitude of defects in track/vehicle and relative extent to which they contribute to derailment proneness, should be done.

DEFECTS/FEATURES AFFECTING Q
1. Rusted rail lying on cess, emergency xover 2. Newly turned wheel tool marks 3. Sanding of rails (on steep gradient, curves) 4. Sharp flange (radius of flange tip < 5mm) increases biting action

DEFECTS/FEATURES CAUSING INCREASED ANGLE OF ATTACK

Excessive slack gauge Thin flange (<16mm at 13mm from flange tip for BG or MG) Excessive clearance between horn cheek and axle box groove Sharp curves and turnouts Outer axles of multi axle rigid wheel base subject to greater angularity, compared to inner wheel

DESIGNED ANGULARITY WHILE NEGOTIATING CURVE

PLAY HELPS THE WHEEL NEGOTIATE CURVE

DEFECTS/FEATURES FOR INCREASED ANGLE OF ATTACK

DEFECTS / FEATURE FOR INCREASED POSITIVE ECCENTRICITY
WHEEL FLANGE SLOPE BECOMING STEEPER (THIS DEFECT REDUCES SAFETY DEPTH AS ECCENTRICITY INCREASES)

DEFECT/FEATURES CAUSING PERSISTENT ANGULAR RUNNING

DIFFERENCE IN WHEEL DIA MEASURED ON SAME AXLE INCORRECT CENTRALISATION & ADJUSTMENT OF BRAKE RIGGING AND BRAKE BLOCKS WEAR IN BRAKE GEARS HOT AXLE HIGHER COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION DIFFERENT BEARING PRESSURES

STABILITY ANALYSIS
Q & Y Instantaneous values, measurement by MEASURING WHEEL Hy = Horizontal force measured at axle box level Q = (Vertical) spring deflection x spring constant

STABILITY ANALYSIS
Nadals Formula

Y tan F  Q " Q 1  Q tan F

for F=68, Q=0.25

Dry Rail 0.33 Wet Rail 0.25 Lubricated Rail 0.13 Rusted Rail 0.6

RHS works out to 1.4, rounded off to 1.0 for a factor of safety On I.R. Hy/Q measurement over 0.05 sec. It is one of the criteria for assessing stability of Rolling Stock

 LIMITING VALUES OF Y/Q RATIO VS TIME DURATION (JAPANESE RAILWAY)

 DIRECTION OF SLIDING FRICTION AT TREAD OF NON-DERAILING WHEEL

CHARTETS FORMULA
Y Q " K
1

 K

Qo Q

tan F  Q K 1!  Q ' K 1  Q tan F

K2 = 2(Q+ K )

Q' !

2Q

K = Angle of coning of wheel K = 1/20 = 0.05 Q = 0.25 K1 = 2 K2 } 0.7

FOR SAFETY

y Qo " 2  0 .7 Q Q
Y >2Q 0.7Qo 2Q <Y + 0.7Qo As Y p 0 2Q <0.7Qo Q < 0.35Qo Instantaneous Wheel Load Q should not drop below 35% of nominal wheel load Qo.
For safety, the Q limited to 60 % of Qo

EFFECT OF TWIST ON VEHICLE

REFERRING TO FIG.
a = Distance between centres of the spring A&B bearing on the wheel set PA = Load reaction in spring A PB = Load reaction in spring B G = Dynamic gauge R1 = rail reaction under wheel 1 R2 = rail reaction under wheel-2 e = amount of overhang of spring centre beyond the wheel rail contact point.

Contd..

Let the rail under wheel-2 be depressed suddenly by an extent Zo, so that the instantaneous value of R2 becomes zero, i.e. the wheel load of wheel-2 drops to zero.

Contd..
Under effect of lowering of rail, spring B would elongate and load reaction PB would drop Taking moments about spring B PA a+ m (G/2+e) = R1 (G +e) + R2e = R1 (G+e) (since R2 = 0) (i) Taking moments about spring A PB a+ m (G/2+e) = R1e + R2 (G+e) = R1e (since R2 = 0) (ii)

Contd..
Subtracting (i) from (ii) (PA-PB) a = R1G or PA PB = R1 G/a Now, R1 + R2 = T/2 @ R1 = T/2, since R2 = 0 @PA PB = T/2 *G/a

Contd..

Difference in deflections of the springs A & B (owing to difference in the load reactions viz PA PB = f (PA PB), where f is specific deflection (assuming f to be the same for all the springs) That is, the difference in deflections of the two springs. = f *T/2* G/a

 By geometry, the above difference implies a difference in the levels of the two rails under the wheel set under consideration, to be

T G T G G ! f a ! f 2 a 2 a

 Obviously, this is the extent by which the rail under wheel 2 would required to be depressed to reduce R2 instantaneously to zero. 2 i.e.
1 2

T G Z0 ! f 2 a

EFFECT OF TRACK AND VEHICLE TWIST

Track Defect that will completely off load the wheel Zo = fT (G/a)2 This equation is given by Kereszty

EFFECT OF STIFFNESS OF SPRINGS

Larger f i.e. deflection per unit, better from off loading point of view

LOADED / EMPTY CONDITION OF VEHICLE

Larger the T, Better it is An empty wagon is more prone for derailment

 G/a RATIO - should be Large Overhang should be less G/a ratio less for MG than BG

VARIATIONS IN SPRING STIFFNESSES

One spring Zs = x/2 (G/a) x p Defect in one spring Diagonally opposite springs Zs = x (G/a) = 2Zs

TORSIONAL STIFFNESS OF VEHICLE UNDER FRAME

Converted to Equivalent Track Twist Zu = N T/4 (G/a)2 N p Specific deflection of a corner of under frame Torsionally flexible under frame is desirable Riveted under frame desirable as against welded one

TRANSITION OF A CURVE
Track Cant Gradient should be as flat as possible Effect on vehicle Zb = i.L, i p Cant Gradient L = wheel base Longer wheel base is not desirable

PERMISSIBLE TRACK TWIST

Zperm = 0.65 Zo Zs + Zu Zb (If one spring is defective) Zperm = 0.65 Zo 2Zs + Zu Zb (If two diagonal springs are defective)

Motions of Vehicle
(a) Linear oscillation; (b) rotational oscillation

Motions of Vehicle

HUNTING: COMBINED ROLLING + NOSING (VIOLENT MOTION)

TRACK & VEHICLE DEFECTSS CAUSING VARIOUS PARASITIC MOTIONS

A. TRACK DEFECTS X-Level Loose Packing Low Joint Alignment Slack Gauge Versine Variation PARASITIC MOTION Rolling Bouncing, Rolling Pitching Nosing, Lurching Nosing, Lurching Nosing, Hunting

VEHICLE DEFECTS CAUSING PARASITC MOTION

A. VEHICLE DEFECT Coupling Worn wheel Ineffective spring Side Bearer Clearance In-effective Pivot PARASITIC MOTION Shuttling, Nosing Hunting, Nosing, Lurching Bouncing, Pitching, Rolling Rolling, Nosing Nosing

Contd..

TRACK DEFECT Low joint Unevenness Loose Packing Alignment Gauge Fault Twist

MODE OF OSCILLATIONS Bouncing & Pitching

AFFECTS VALUE Q

Lurching, Nosing & Rolling Rolling

Y Q Q

The above track defects when occurring in cyclic form would cause external excitation Hence, Adequate Damping Necessary

EFFECT OF CYCLIC TRACK IRREGULARITY ON VEHICLE

Contd

Oscillation mode of vehicle will be bouncing and pitching For speed v = 13 m/s, excitation freq. Pt=13m For speed v = 26 m/s excitation freq. = 2 cps, Pt=13m This is forcing frequency, f = v/Pt

Contd Natural frequency of a vehicle in a particular mode of oscillation : Frequency of osc. in that mode, when system oscillates freely, after removal of external forcing frequency. For simple spring of stiffness k & mass m natural freq.,

1 fn= 2T

k m

For 2 stage suspension system, there would be 2 natural frequencies.

RESONANCE
Natural Frequency =

1 2T

k m

k = Spring Stiffness m = Mass If frequency caused by external excitation is equal to natural frequency, resonance occurs under no damping condition

 FOUR TYPES OF FREE OSCILLATIONS FOR SAKE OF COMPARISON

 MAGNIFICATION FACTOR VERSUS FREQUENCY RATIO FOR VARIOUS AMOUNTS OF DAMPING FOR SIMPLE SPRING MASS DAMPER SYSTEM SHOWN.

PRIMARY HUNTING
WHEN THE BODY OSCILLATIONS ARE HIGH WHILE THE BOGIE IS RELATIVELY STABLE EXPERIENCED AT LOW SPEEDS MAINLY AFFECTS RIDING COMFORT

SECONDARY HUNTING
WHEN THE BODY OSCILLATIONS ARE RELATIVELY LESS. WHILE THE BOGIE OSCILATIONS ARE HIGH EXPERINCED AT HIGH SPEEDS AFFECTS VEHICLES STABILITY

CRICITAL SPEED
THE SPEED AT THE BOUNDARY CONDTION BETWEEN THE STABLE & UNSTABLE CONDITON IS CALLED AS CRITICAL SPEED OF THE VEHICLE THE SPEED FOR WHICH THE ROLLING STOCK IS CLEARED FOR THE SERVICE IS NORMALLY ABOUT 10 TO 15% LESS THAN THEC RITICAL SPEED AT WHICH THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN TESTED.

FACTORS AFFECTING CRITICAL SPEED

1. VEHICLE WHEEL PROFILE 2. RAIL HEAD PROFILE, INCLINATION & GAUGE 3. RAIL WHEEL COEFF. OF FRICTION 4. AXLE LOAD AND DISTRIBUTION OF VEHICLE MASS 5. DESIGN AND CONDITION OF VEHICLE SUSPENSION

LATERAL STABILITY OF TRACK

LATERAL TRACK DISTROTION DUE TO LESS LATERAL STRENGTH EXCESSIVE LATERAL FORCES BY VEHICLE

LATERAL STABILITY OF TRACK

THIS STUDY IS IMPORTANT FOR
ASSESSMENT OF STABILITY OF ROLLING STOCK INVESTIGATION OF DERAILMENTS

PRUDHOMES FORMULA
Hy > 0.85 (1+P/3) Hy> LATERAL FORCE P = AXLE LOAD (t)

Allowable Twist in Track

RDSO letter no CRA 501 dtd 29.04.83
Speed Peak value of Peak value of (KMPH) UN on 3.6m TW on 3.6m chord (mm) chord (mm) 75 14 13 60 45 30 15 16 22 24 33 15 22 25 30 Twist (mm/M) 1 in 276 1 in 240 1 in 163 1 in 144 1 in 120

Allowable Twist in Track

Allowable rate of change of cant actual on curves:
Normal 55 mm/sec Exceptional 35 mm/sec With the changing speeds, the time element increases and therefore, the allowable change in the cant actual also increases. The allowable twist in track, therefore, increases with the reduction in speed

Allowable change in gauge

Maximum gauge variations permitted are not laid down. In any case, the safety tolerances are not laid down in the manual Para 237(8)(a): It is a good practice to maintain uniform gauge over turnouts If there is a derailment over P & Cs, the gauge variation is often a point of controversy. We shall use the allowable variation in versines to check if the gauge variation is within limits