Running safety analysis of a freight train passing through a single crossover during braking

References

• Bezin Y, Pålsson BA. Multibody simulation benchmark for dynamic vehicle-track interaction in switches and crossings: modelling description and simulation tasks. Veh Syst Dyn. 2021:1–16. DOI: 10.1080/00423114.2021.1942079.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Innovative concepts and designs for resilient S&Cs. Capacity for Rail (C4R); 2017 (Final report).
   Google Scholar
• Pålsson BA, Nielsen JCO. Wheel–rail interaction and damage in switches and crossings. Veh Syst Dyn. 2012;50(1):43–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grossoni I, Hughes P, Bezin Y, et al. Observed failures at railway turnouts: Failure analysis, possible causes and links to current and future research. Eng Fail Anal. 2021;119:1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nissen A. Analysis of statistics of maintenance requirements for railway turnouts. Swedish: Luleå University of Technology; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Zwanenburg WJ. Modelling degradation processes of switches & crossings for maintenance & renewal planning on the Swiss railway network. Netherlands: Delft University of Technology; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Kassa E, Andersson C, Nielsen JCO. Simulation of dynamic interaction between train and railway turnout. Veh Syst Dyn. 2006;44(3):247–258.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kassa E, Nielsen JCO. Dynamic interaction between train and railway turnout: full-scale field test and validation of simulation models. Veh Syst Dyn. 2008;46(suppl. 1):521–534.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kassa E, Nielsen JC. Stochastic analysis of dynamic interaction between train and railway turnout. Veh Syst Dyn. 2008;46(5):429–449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kassa E, Johansson G. Simulation of train-turnout interaction and plastic deformation of rail profiles. Veh Syst Dyn. 2006;44(supp. 1):349–359.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li X, Nielsen JCO, Pålsson BA. Simulation of track settlement in railway turnouts. Veh Syst Dyn. 2014;52(sup1):421–439.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu J, Ma Q, Zhao S, et al. Effect of wheel flat on dynamic wheel-rail impact in railway turnouts. Veh Syst Dyn. 2021:1–20. DOI: 10.1080/00423114.2021.1876888
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lai J, Xu J, Wang P, et al. Numerical investigation of dynamic derailment behavior of railway vehicle when passing through a turnout. Eng Fail Anal. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2020.105132
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bugarín MR, Díaz-de-Villegas JMG. Improvements in railway switches. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit. 2002;216(4):275–286.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lagos RF, Alonso A, Vinolas J, et al. Rail vehicle passing through a turnout: analysis of different turnout designs and wheel profiles. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit. 2012;226(6):587–602.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pålsson BA, Nielsen NJ. Track gauge optimisation of railway switches using a genetic algorithm. Veh Syst Dyn. 2012;50(sup1):365–387.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang P, Ma X, Wang J, et al. Optimization of rail profiles to improve vehicle running stability in switchpanel of high-speed railway turnouts. Math Probl Eng. 2017; 2017(1):1–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liao B, Luo Y. Influence of alignments of guide curves on the passing performance of railway turnout diverging route. Veh Syst Dyn. 2020:1–16. DOI: 10.1080/00423114.2020.1827152
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Z, Li G, Chu G, et al. Dynamic performance analysis of heavy-haul locomotives running through turnout branches with electric brake. Veh Syst Dyn. 2020;58(7):1057–1075.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ge X, Ling L, Guo L, et al. Dynamic derailment simulation of an empty wagon passing a turnout in the through route. Veh Syst Dyn. 2020: 1–22. DOI: 10.1080/00423114.2020.1849744
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpack Assistant 2021. Dassault Systems; 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Wu Q, Spiryagin M, Cole C, et al. International benchmarking of longitudinal train dynamics simulators: results. Veh Syst Dyn. 2018;56(3):343–365.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou Y, Shi Z, Hecht M. Comparison of friction draft gear models for simulation in longitudinal train dynamics. Veh Syst Dyn. 2021: 1–15. DOI: 10.1080/00423114.2021.1901943
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye Y, Shi D, Krause P, et al. Wheel flat can cause or exacerbate wheel polygonization. Veh Syst Dyn. 2020;58(10):1575–1604.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye Y, Sun Y, Dongfang S, et al. Optimizing wheel profiles and suspensions for railway vehicles operating on specific lines to reduce wheel wear: a case study. Multibody Syst Dyn. 2021;51:91–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hecht M, Keudel J. Numerische Simulation eines Selbstentladewagens mit Y25-Drehgestellen. Technische Universität Berlin; 2005. (Report No. 31/2005).
   Google Scholar
• Ge X, Ling L, Chen S, et al. Countermeasures for preventing coupler jack-knifing of slave control locomotives in 20,000-tonne heavy-haul trains during cycle braking. Veh Syst Dyn. 2021:1–22. DOI: 10.1080/00423114.2021.1942509
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu Q, Cole C, Luo S, et al. A review of dynamics modelling of friction draft gear. Veh Syst Dyn. 2014;52(6):733–758.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BS EN 15551: Railway applications - Railway rolling stock - Buffers, 2017 edition, February 2017.
   Google Scholar
• BS EN 15566: Railway applications - Railway rolling stock - Draw gear and screw coupling, 2016 edition, October 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Track centreline distance. https://www.trackopedia.info/encyclopedia/maintenance-of-way/track-measurements/track-centreline-distance.
   Google Scholar
• Sebès M, Bezin Y. Considering the interaction of switch and stock rails in modelling vehicle-track interaction in a switch panel diverging route. Veh Syst Dyn. 2021:1–17. DOI: 10.1080/00423114.2021.1947510
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shih JY, Kostovasilis D, Benzin Y, et al. Modelling options for ballast track dynamics. Proceedings of the 24th International Congress on Sound and Vibration: London Calling. 2017;3746–3753.
   Google Scholar
• Bezin Y, Pålsson BA. Multibody simulation benchmark for dynamic vehicle-track interaction in switches and crossings: Modelling description and simulation tasks. University of Huddersfield; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Kalker JJ. Three-Dimensional elastic bodies in rolling contact. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Kalker JJ. A fast algorithm for the simplified theory of rolling contact. Veh Syst Dyn. 1982;11(1):1–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BS EN 15839: Railway applications-Testing for the acceptance of running characteristics of railway vehicles-Freight wagons-Testing of running safety under longitudinal compressive forces. CEN, Brussels; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• BS EN 14363: Railway applications-Testing for the acceptance of running characteristics of railway vehicles-Freight wagons-Testing of running behaviour and stationary tests. CEN, Brussels; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Olofsson U, Telliskivi T. Wear, plastic deformation and friction of two rail steels—a full-scale test and a laboratory study. Wear. 2003;254(1-2):80–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polach O. Creep forces in simulations of traction vehicles running on adhesion limit. Wear. 2005;258(7-8):992–1000.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schelle H, Hecht M. Fahrtechnische zulassung: einfluss von randbedingungen in der simulation. ZEVrail. 2013;137(8):307–313.
   Google Scholar
• Magel EE. A survey of wheel/rail friction. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration; 2017 (Report No. DOT/FRA/ORD-17/21).
   Google Scholar