00 голосов за00 голосов против

1 просмотров12 стр.Dec 07, 2019

© © All Rights Reserved

1 просмотров

00 голосов за00 голосов против

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 12

net/publication/273171447

Article in Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part F Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit · January 2013

DOI: 10.1177/0954409713508110

CITATIONS READS

5 857

4 authors, including:

Huailong Shi

Southwest Jiaotong University

30 PUBLICATIONS 134 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Huailong Shi on 22 March 2016.

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical

Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid

Transit

http://pif.sagepub.com/

Huai-long Shi, Ping-bo Wu, Ren Luo and Jin-ying Guo

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit published online 31

October 2013

DOI: 10.1177/0954409713508110

http://pif.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/10/23/0954409713508110

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Additional services and information for Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit

can be found at:

Subscriptions: http://pif.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

What is This?

XML Template (2013) [16.10.2013–3:47pm] [1–10]

//blrnas3/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIFJ/Vol00000/130128/APPFile/SG-PIFJ130128.3d (PIF) [PREPRINTER stage]

Original Article

J Rail and Rapid Transit

Calculation and laboratory testing of the 0(0) 1–10

! IMechE 2013

rotation resistance of a bogie Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0954409713508110

pif.sagepub.com

Abstract

The rotation movement between bogie and carbody is studied using vehicle system dynamics theory and formulas for the

rotation resistance factor are derived for different air spring states. Laboratory tests are conducted and the obtained

results are compared with calculations. The rotation resistance factor for motor and trailer cars experiencing AW0 and

AW4 loading conditions when air springs are in inflated, deflated and over-inflated states are considered so as to validate

the proposed formulas and test and discuss error sources. The rotation resistance factor of the bogie is related to the

rotation angle and speed. The faster the rotation speed, then the greater is the rotation resistance factor. The greater the

rotation angle, then the greater is the rotation resistance factor. The maximum rotation resistance factor is 0.094 for a

trailer car at a rotation speed of 1 deg/s and experiencing AW0 loading conditions and with the air springs in the deflated

state. The maximum rotation resistance factor when the air springs are deflated is much greater than that when the air

springs are in the inflated state for a rotation speed of 1 deg/s. The maximum rotation resistance factor obtained at a

rotation speed of 1 deg/s is much greater than the one obtained at 0.2 deg/s. The over-inflated state of air springs has

little influence on the rotation resistance of the bogie. The calculated results obtained when considering air springs in

inflated and over-inflated states are slightly smaller than test results with a maximum difference of 0.02. For the deflated

state of the air springs, the calculated and test results for a trailer car are equivalent and the calculated results are slightly

larger than the test results for a motor car with a maximum difference of about 0.02. The theoretical formulas should

consider the dynamic nature of stiffness properties and damping effect of air springs. The effects of other suspension

components should also be considered. A laboratory test or field test after assembly is an essential requirement. The

comparison of test and calculated results validates the proposed formulas and allows sources of error to be discussed.

Keyword

Bogie rotation resistance; theoretical calculation; laboratory test; rotation angle; rotation speed; air springs; deflated;

inflated; over-inflated

The resistance to rotation of a bogie aﬀects the results in comparison studies with calculations to iso-

dynamic performance of railway vehicles especially late the sources of errors. It is also importance for

their ability to negotiate curves and their hunting sta- practitioners to know the assumptions behind the cal-

bility. In fact it is important enough that it is used as a culation models so that they can decide which formula

performance test after assembly. A large value of is suitable for their particular application.

rotation resistance worsens the curve negotiation abil- The dynamic behavior of railway vehicles has been

ity while a smaller value worsens the running stability considered by Eickhoﬀ et al.1 According to their

in a straight line, thus it is important to create an review of modeling methods used for railway vehicles,

appropriate rotation resistance for the bogie at the the models of suspension systems need to consider

vehicle design stage. The theoretical calculation of a components such as air springs, anti-roll bar,

bogie’s rotation resistance is of considerable interest.

Results obtained in a rotation resistance test can be State Key Laboratory of Traction Power, Southwest Jiaotong University,

used to verify the accuracy and validity of these People’s Republic of China

calculations.

Corresponding author:

The calculation of the rotation resistance of a bogie

Huai-long Shi, State Key Laboratory of Traction Power, Southwest

on a freight car is extensively discussed in the litera- Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, Sichuan, People’s Republic of

ture, however, only a few articles discuss the accuracy China.

and validity of these calculations. Thus, there is a need Email: shihuailong1003@126.com

XML Template (2013) [16.10.2013–3:47pm] [1–10]

//blrnas3/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIFJ/Vol00000/130128/APPFile/SG-PIFJ130128.3d (PIF) [PREPRINTER stage]

load-sensitive dampers that display friction eﬀects and tow-axle passenger vehicle were reported by Huang

rubber bushings that display hysteresis eﬀects. The and Wang16 and Simson and Brymer.17 However

combination of these components allows valid and these papers did not present calculation formulas

sophisticated modeling methods and techniques that and tests for air springs in an over-inﬂated state and

can yield accurate results. A test procedure and evalu- diﬀerent rotation speeds.

ation indicators of rotation resistance of a bogie that This paper presents theoretical formulas for bogie

are based on the standard EN143632 have been dis- rotation resistance for air springs in deﬂated, inﬂated

cussed by Julian and Evert.3 However, only the basic and over-inﬂated states. A laboratory test is con-

speciﬁcations for laboratory or ﬁeld tests are pre- ducted and its results are compared with the results

sented and no discussion about error sources or con- obtained in theoretical calculations. The bogie rota-

sideration of tests at diﬀerent air spring states is tion resistance factor for a motor and a trailer car

presented. under AW0 and AW4 loading conditions at diﬀerent

The force distributions for three-piece bogies of a air spring states are summarized to validate the pro-

freight car at various load conditions have been ana- posed formulas and test and discuss error sources.

lyzed by Simson and Pearce4–6 and Simson and

Brymer.7 The inﬂuences of rotation resistance of a

bogie on wheel/rail contact and wear on curves were

Dynamics model of a railway vehicle

discussed. The greater the rotation resistance, then the The model of the dynamics of the railway vehicle is

higher is the wheel/rail wear. Bogie rotation resistance shown in Figure 1. KS and CS are the stiﬀness and

was modeled in order to account for uneven loading damping of the secondary suspension system, respect-

eﬀects in track curve transitions. The design of tran- ively, KP and CP are the stiﬀness and damping of the

sition curvature and the lubrication of rail and center primary suspension system, respectively. 2aþ is the

bearings or side bearers can be used to reduce the high bogie’s wheel base and 2a* is the distance between

wheel/rail wear in three-piece bogies caused by high the centers of two bogies. The relation of the rotation

bogie rotation resistance. resistance torque and rotation angle for a bogie can be

Emereole et al.8 pointed out that there is a very described as shown in Figure 2 provided that the non-

strong correlation between wear and the average linear properties of the suspension system are ignored.

absolute angle of attack of the wheelset. The total M represents the rotation torque between the carbody

wear on the wheels increases with center bearer fric- and bogie, represents the rotation angle and K rep-

tion level. An extensive simulation-based parametric resents the rotation stiﬀness between the bogie and

study was performed to determine the eﬀects of vary- carbody. The bouncing and pitching movements of

ing side bearer type, center bearer friction level, the carbody are considered while other degrees of

wagon load conditions and speed on the wear charac- freedom are constrained.

teristics of the wheelset.

Wu et al.9 and Wu and Robeda10 pointed out that

a vehicle will exhibit signiﬁcantly shortened wheel Theoretical calculation of the rotation

maintenance cycle times as a result of a high bogie resistance of a bogie

rotation resistance being retained into the curve and

Definition of rotation resistance factor

high wheelset angles of attack on the leading bogie.

These insights were obtained from vehicle dynamics The rotation resistance factor is used as an index to

simulations performed using the software package measure rotation resistance. It can be expressed as

VAMPIRE. Wear rates can be accelerated due to

the negative impact high angles of attack have on M

X¼ ð1Þ

gauge face lubrication. Bogie warp and wheelset 2Q0 2aþ

angles of attack retained in constant radius curves

are aﬀected by lateral forces such as coupler angle where X is the rotation resistance factor for a bogie,

train forces. M is the rotation resistance torque (unit: kN-m),

The longitudinal stiﬀness created by the friction

eﬀects of center and side bearers contribute to the

rotation resistance of a bogie on a freight car and

thus reducing the distance between two side bearers

can reduce the extent of the rotation resistance.11,12

The operating movements of a rail vehicle during its

transition around a curve was analyzed by Lacker.13

Katta and Conry14 studied the dynamic stiﬀness of

the center bearer of a freight car and presented a

damping model and Toyofuku et al.15 studied the

dynamic properties of air springs. A test procedure

and evaluation indicators for rotation resistance of a Figure 1. Model of the dynamics of the railway vehicle.

XML Template (2013) [16.10.2013–3:47pm] [1–10]

//blrnas3/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIFJ/Vol00000/130128/APPFile/SG-PIFJ130128.3d (PIF) [PREPRINTER stage]

Shi et al. 3

movement of a bogie at high running velocities but is

small enough to create a good curve transition per-

formance. The eﬀect of a yaw damper is not further

considered in this paper.

tion resistance of a bogie comes from the horizontal

stiﬀness of the air springs when they are in the inﬂated

Figure 2. Relation between rotation torque and angle.

and over-inﬂated states. The stiﬀness has dynamic

properties that related to movement frequency, amp-

2Q0 is the average axle load of the bogie (unit: kN) litude and vertical load.

and 2aþ is the bogie’s wheel base (unit: m). The rotation resistance torque can be calculated

The rotation angle between the carbody and bogie using

can be computed using2

M ¼ KSX ðd sin Þ 2d ð4Þ

a 0:020

¼ þ ð2Þ

Rmin 2aþ where M is the rotation resistance torque (unit: kN-

m), KSX is the horizontal stiﬀness of the air springs

a (unit: kN/m), 2d is the distance between two air

eval ¼ ð3Þ

Rmin springs on a bogie (unit: m) in this case 2d ¼ 2 m

and is the rotation angle between carbody and

where is the rotation angle between carbody and bogie.

bogie, 2a* is the distance between the centers of two

bogies (unit: m) in this case 2a* ¼ 15.6 m, 2aþ is Deflated air springs. When the air springs are in a

the bogie’s wheel base (unit: m) in this case deﬂated state nearly all the rotation resistance of a

2aþ ¼ 2.5 m and Rmin is the minimum curve radius bogie comes from the friction force of the sliding

(unit: m) in this case Rmin ¼ 300 m. plate in the air springs. The friction force is related

Equation (2) reﬂects the rotation angle that is to the vertical load on the air springs and the friction

achieved at the minimum curve radius Rmin speciﬁed coeﬃcient of sliding plate.

for the vehicle and includes the eﬀect of wheel/rail The rotation resistance torque can be written as

clearances. Without the gauge clearances the rotation

angle could be described as in equation (3) with the M ¼ W 2d ð5Þ

rotation angle being 1.49 when the radius is 300 m. In

order to be able to make valid comparisons with the where M is the rotation resistance torque (unit: kN-

laboratory test results, a curve with radius 300 m was m), W is the vertical load on the air springs (unit: kN),

considered since this is the most common curve radius is the friction coeﬃcient of the sliding plate inside

for an extreme track situation. the air springs, in this case ¼ 0.09 and 2d is the dis-

The factor should be X 4 0.1 for a railway passen- tance between two air springs on a bogie (unit: m) in

ger vehicle indicating that the rotation speed should this case 2d ¼ 2 m.

be constant at set rotation speed of 0.2 deg/s or 1 deg/s Table 1 presents the load data and characteristics

for at least 75% of the rotation angle amplitude of air springs of the vehicle. AW0 represents the vehi-

according to EN14363. 2 cle when it is a tare load condition with the usual

operating equipment and ﬂuids installed i.e. water

tanks full, toilet waste tanks empty, but no passen-

Theoretical calculations

gers. AW4 is an extremely heavy load condition with

The research reported in the literature on rotation all seats occupied and with an extra nine people per

resistance of bogies shows that the horizontal stiﬀness square meter. T represents the trailer car and M rep-

of the air springs and the friction coeﬃcient of the resents the motor car. Table 2 shows the results of the

slide and center plates are the most signiﬁcant param- calculations for the cases when the rotation resistance

eters that determine the level of rotation resistance. factor is assumed to be 0.022–0.060 for all cases. In

The other suspension components such as draw bar, the inﬂated and over-inﬂated states, the factor for

anti-roll bar, vertical damper and horizontal damper AW4 loading is slightly less than that for AW0 load-

have only a minor eﬀect on the level of rotation resist- ing. The factor of the trailer car is slightly bigger than

ance. Thus, these parameters can be ignored in calcu- for the motor car. Among the deﬂated, inﬂated and

lations. It should be noted that the yaw damper will over-inﬂated states, the factor for the deﬂated or over-

provide some resistance. The higher the rotation inﬂated state is greater than that for the inﬂated state

speed, then the greater is the resistance. However, and the factor in the deﬂated state displays the overall

the main function of a yaw damper is create a rotation maximum value.

XML Template (2013) [16.10.2013–3:47pm] [1–10]

//blrnas3/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIFJ/Vol00000/130128/APPFile/SG-PIFJ130128.3d (PIF) [PREPRINTER stage]

KSX Horizontal stiffness of air springs when deflated kN/m 62.5 134.5 59.8 141.5

KSX Horizontal stiffness of air springs when inflated kN/m 149 182 152 188

KSX Horizontal stiffness of air springs when over-inflated kN/m 169 212 172 218

2Q0 The average axle load of the test bogie kN 103 175 90 171

W Vertical load on air springs kN 62.5 134.5 59.75 141.5

M/AW4 0.055 0.022 0.025

T/AW0 0.048 0.035 0.040

T/AW4 0.060 0.023 0.027

resistance

The rotation movement was measured on the labora-

tory test rig shown in Figures 3 and Figure 4. One Figure 3. Picture of laboratory setup.

bogie is ﬁxed to the turntable represented by the

shaded circle and moves with the turntable so that

moves in a circle. Two actuators are used to drive

the system. The load and displacement time history

of the actuators are recorded for the rotation angle,

speed and rotation resistance torque calculations.

A load sensor is mounted on the top of the actuator

to measure the force applied by the actuator on the

turntable that is required to free it from the eﬀect of

the movement of the actuator rod. The displacement

sensor is mounted along the actuator rod.

During the testing process, the displacement con-

trol method was used to control the turntable so that

it rotated back and forth. Diﬀerent radius curves and Figure 4. Bogie rotation resistance test.

vehicle passing velocities can be simulated using

actuators with diﬀerent moving displacement ampli- During all tests when the air springs were in the

tude and speed. The two actuators each generate a inﬂated state all the leveling valves and cross feeds

sine wave; the sine waves have the same amplitude between airbags were active and all the air springs

and speed but are in opposite phases. The calculation remained fully inﬂated. An air ‘‘stand-up’’ test was

method for rotation angle, speed and rotation resist- performed to monitor the air pressure of air springs

ance torque is illustrated in Figure 5. The maximum or the height of the carbody ﬂoor before and after the

output force of actuator is F1 when the maximum test to conﬁrm that no signiﬁcant air loss had

rotation angle is . occurred during the test. The whole test was declared

void if the carbody dropped more than 5 mm in 12 h.

Both the motor and trailer car’s bogies were tested

Test specification under tare load and heavy load conditions in diﬀerent

Tests were carried out with the air springs in inﬂated, air springs states. During the test, the turntable and

deﬂated and over-inﬂated states. The vehicle reached bogie were rotated by the actuators, so the inertia of a

its normal operating height in the inﬂated state. The moving bogie was measured. This approach accur-

ﬂoor height of the carbody in this case is 0.90 m from ately mimics the actual situation of a vehicle passing

the ground. All the air springs were deﬂated completely round a curve. The resistance and inertia eﬀects of the

in the deﬂated state and were over-inﬂated to the same turntable were subtracted from the test result of the

extent in the over-inﬂated state. The carbody ﬂoor bogie’s rotation resistance. Before the formal test, a

height in this case is 0.93 m from the ground. rotation resistance test was performed for the

XML Template (2013) [16.10.2013–3:47pm] [1–10]

//blrnas3/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIFJ/Vol00000/130128/APPFile/SG-PIFJ130128.3d (PIF) [PREPRINTER stage]

Shi et al. 5

turntable using the same rotation speed and angle 4. Calculate the rotation resistance factor X using

as in the bogie’s rotation resistance test, so that the equation (1).

initial resistance and inertia of turntable were 5. Repeat steps 1 to 4 under diﬀerent rotation speeds

obtained. (0.2 and 1 deg/s).

Results

The turntable’s rotation resistance was measured

using the following test procedure. In order to ensure the validity and credibility of the

data processing method applied to the test results,

1. In the tare load condition, rotate the turntable three continuous peak-to-peak values of the rotation

using the actuators and measure the maximum resistance force history were used to calculate the

force which is regarded as the turntable’s friction rotation resistance force. The average value

force F0. (A1 þ B1 þ A2 þ B2 þ A2 þ B2)/6 was taken as the

2. Calculate the rotation resistance torque of the rotation resistance force of the turntable or bogie to

turntable calculate the rotation resistance torque.

Figure 6 is the time history of the turntable’s rota-

M0 ¼ F0 b

tion resistance force at rotation speeds of 0.2 and

3. Repeat steps 1 and 2 under diﬀerent rotation 1 deg/s. In the utilized data processing method,

speeds (0.2 and 1 deg/s). F0 ¼ 0.209 kN (0.2 deg/s) and F0 ¼ 0.076 kN (1 deg/s)

were treated as the initial rotation resistance force of

the turntable and this was subsequently subtracted

from the test results on the bogie’s rotation resistance.

Testing for the bogie’s rotation resistance

Figures 7 to 9 show the test results on the rotation

The bogie’s rotation resistance was measured under resistance of a bogie on a trailer car for diﬀerent air

diﬀerent air springs states and load conditions using springs states at a rotation speed of 0.2 deg/s. In each

the following the test procedure. ﬁgure, plot (a) is the time history of the bogie’s rota-

tion resistance force and plot (b) shows the relation-

1. Fasten the wheel sets of the bogie under test on the ship between the rotation torque and rotation angle.

turntable then a free bogie is put on the track. It is clear from the ﬁgures that the rotation force when

Both the motor and trailer car are tested in diﬀer- the air springs are inﬂated and over-inﬂated behaves

ent air springs states. like the turntable’s rotation force as a strictly mono-

2. Drive the turntable using the actuators and meas- tone increasing or decreasing waveform shown in

ure the relationship between the rotation force F1 Figures 7(a) and 8(a). The relation between the rota-

and rotation angle . In this case, the rotation tion torque and rotation angle is just same as in

resistance force due to the weight of turntable is Figure 2 showing that the bogie rotation stiﬀness is

included. Then, calculate the turntable’s rotation constant in Figures 7(b) and 8(a). It also shows that

resistance torque the hysteresis characteristics of air springs in inﬂated

M1 ¼ F1 b and over-inﬂated states are nearly the same. Thus, air

springs in an over-inﬂated state have little inﬂuence on

3. The bogie’s rotation resistance torque can be the bogie’s resistance to rotation. Figure 9(a) indicates

described as that sliding occurred between the carbody and

bogie when the air springs were in a deﬂated state.

M ¼ M1 M0 Figure 9(b) shows a signiﬁcant hysteresis

XML Template (2013) [16.10.2013–3:47pm] [1–10]

//blrnas3/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIFJ/Vol00000/130128/APPFile/SG-PIFJ130128.3d (PIF) [PREPRINTER stage]

B1 B2 B3

0.2

0.1

0.1

F0 / kN

F0/ kN

0.0 0.0

-0.1

-0.1

-0.2

A1 A2 A3

-0.3 -0.2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

time /s time /s

Figure 6. Time history of turntable rotation resistance force with rotation speed (a) 0.2 deg/s and (b) 1 deg/s.

(a) 6 (b) 15

4 10

M1 /(kN·m)

2 5

F1 / kN

0 0

-2 -5

-4 -10

-6 -15

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0

time /s θ /(°)

Figure 7. Rotation resistance of the bogie when air springs are in inflated state (a) time history of the bogie’s rotation resistance

force and (b) resistance torque as a function of rotation angle.

(a) 6 (b) 15

4 10

M1 /(kN·m)

2 5

F1 / kN

0 0

-2 -5

-4 -10

-6 -15

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0

time /s θ /(°)

Figure 8. Rotation resistance of the bogie when air springs are in over-inflated state (a) time history of bogie’s rotation resistance

force and (b) resistance torque as a function of rotation angle.

(a) 6 (b) 15

4 10

M1 /(kN·m)

2 5

F1 / kN

0 0

-2 -5

-4 -10

-6 -15

50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0

time /s θ /(°)

Figure 9. Rotation resistance of the bogie when air springs are in deflated state (a) time history of bogie’s rotation resistance force

and (b) resistance torque as a function of rotation angle.

XML Template (2013) [16.10.2013–3:47pm] [1–10]

//blrnas3/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIFJ/Vol00000/130128/APPFile/SG-PIFJ130128.3d (PIF) [PREPRINTER stage]

Shi et al. 7

characteristic occurs for the deﬂated state compared Tables 3 and 4 show the rotation characteristics of

with the behavior of the inﬂated and over-inﬂated a trailer car in AW0 and AW4 loading conditions,

states. This is mainly a result of the friction damping respectively. Tables 5 and 6 show the rotation char-

eﬀect of the sliding plate. The bogie’s maximum rota- acteristics of the motor car in AW0 and AW4 loading

tion resistance factor is 0.094 for a trailer car in AW0 conditions, respectively.

loading in the deﬂated state. However, the bogie’s Table 7 shows a summary of the test results on the

rotation resistance factor of the motor car and trailer bogie’s rotation resistance factor. First, the results

car are nearly the same. show that the bogie’s rotation resistance factor at

Trailer bogie tare load Symbol Deflated Inflated Over-inflated Deflated Inflated Over-inflated

Tested force (kN) F1 4.128 4.434 4.349 8.360 5.194 5.384

Rotation distance (m) b 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5

Turntable torque (kN-m) M 0 ¼ F0 b 0.523 0.523 0.523 0.190 0.190 0.190

Test torque (kN-m) M 1 ¼ F1 b 10.319 11.085 10.873 20.901 12.984 13.459

Bogie torque (kN-m) M ¼ M1 – M0 9.796 10.563 10.351 20.711 12.794 13.269

Average axleload (kN) 2Q0 88.29 88.29 88.29 88.29 88.29 88.29

Bogie wheelbase (m) 2aþ 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5

X X ¼ M/2Q0 2aþ 0.044 0.048 0.047 0.094 0.058 0.060

Trailer bogie heavy load Symbol Deflated Inflated Over-inflated Deflated Inflated Over-inflated

Tested force (kN) F1 7.431 7.282 7.578 13.385 9.025 8.533

Rotation distance (m) b 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5

Turntable torque (kN-m) M0 ¼ F0 b 0.523 0.523 0.523 0.190 0.190 0.190

Test torque (kN-m) M1 ¼ F1 b 18.576 18.205 18.944 33.462 22.562 21.333

Bogie torque (kN-m) M ¼ M1 – M0 18.054 17.683 18.421 33.272 22.372 21.143

Average axleload (kN) 2Q0 168.242 168.242 168.242 168.242 168.242 168.242

Bogie wheelbase (m) 2aþ 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5

X X ¼ M/2Q0 2aþ 0.043 0.042 0.044 0.079 0.053 0.050

Motor bogie tare load Symbol Deflated Inflated Over-inflated Deflated Inflated Over-inflated

Tested force (kN) F1 4.491 5.294 4.674 7.822 5.862 4.854

Rotation distance (m) b 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5

Turntable torque (kN-m) M0 ¼ F0 b 0.523 0.523 0.523 0.190 0.190 0.190

Test torque (kN-m) M1 ¼ F1 b 11.228 13.235 11.685 19.555 14.655 12.135

Bogie torque (kN-m) M ¼ M1 – M0 10.705 12.713 11.163 19.365 14.465 11.945

Average axleload (kN) 2Q0 101.043 101.043 101.043 101.043 101.043 101.043

Bogie wheelbase (m) 2aþ 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5

X X ¼ M/2Q0 2aþ 0.042 0.050 0.044 0.077 0.057 0.047

XML Template (2013) [16.10.2013–3:47pm] [1–10]

//blrnas3/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIFJ/Vol00000/130128/APPFile/SG-PIFJ130128.3d (PIF) [PREPRINTER stage]

Motor bogie heavy load Symbol Deflated Inflated Over-inflated Deflated Inflated Over-inflated

Tested force (kN) F1 7.575 7.499 7.416 13.405 8.266 8.877

Rotation distance (m) b 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5

Turntable torque (kN-m) M0 ¼ F0 b 0.523 0.523 0.523 0.190 0.190 0.190

Test torque (kN-m) M1 ¼ F1 b 18.938 18.747 18.540 33.513 20.665 22.192

Bogie torque (kN-m) M ¼ M1 – M0 18.416 18.225 18.018 33.323 20.475 22.002

Average axleload (kN) 2Q0 171.675 171.675 171.675 171.675 171.675 171.675

Bogie wheelbase (m) 2aþ 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5

X X ¼ M/2Q0 2aþ 0.043 0.042 0.042 0.078 0.048 0.051

T/AW4 0.043 0.042 0.044 0.079 0.053 0.050

M/AW0 0.042 0.050 0.044 0.077 0.057 0.047

M/AW4 0.043 0.042 0.042 0.078 0.048 0.051

T/AW4 0.055 0.022 0.025 0.043 0.042 0.044

M/AW0 0.048 0.035 0.040 0.042 0.050 0.044

M/AW4 0.060 0.023 0.027 0.043 0.042 0.042

the speed of 1 deg/s is much bigger than the result which is much larger than air damping, so the deﬂated

at the speed of 0.2 deg/s. Thus, it can be concluded state is worse than the inﬂated and over-inﬂated

that the bogie’s rotation resistance factor is related states. The maximum rotation resistance factor is

to the rotation speed. The faster the rotation speed, 0.094 for a trailer car under the AW0 loading condi-

then the greater is the rotation resistance factor. This tion and the air springs in the deﬂated state. However,

is mainly caused by the dynamic stiﬀness property of the rotation resistance factors of the motor car and

the air springs, i.e. the faster the moving speed the trailer car are nearly the same.

greater is the stiﬀness, which directly aﬀects the rota- Comparing the test results in Table 7 and theoret-

tion resistance of the bogie. ical calculation results in Table 2, the test results at

In addition, the results show that there is little dif- the rotation speed of 1 deg/s are larger than the test

ference between air springs in the inﬂated and over- results at 0.2 deg/s and the calculated results. As the

inﬂated states which indicates that over-inﬂation has theoretical calculation did not consider the eﬀect of

little inﬂuence on the rotation resistance of the bogie. rotation speed, a comparison between the theoretical

However, the results show that there is a major calculation results and laboratory test results at the

diﬀerence between air springs in the inﬂated and rotation speed of 0.2 deg/s is presented in Table 8. The

deﬂated states at the rotation speed of 1 deg/s; the following conclusions can be drawn.

deﬂated state of air springs has a signiﬁcant eﬀect

on the rotation resistance. This is mainly a result of 1. In the inﬂated and over-inﬂated states of the air

the friction damping eﬀect created by the sliding plate springs, the calculated results are slightly smaller

XML Template (2013) [16.10.2013–3:47pm] [1–10]

//blrnas3/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIFJ/Vol00000/130128/APPFile/SG-PIFJ130128.3d (PIF) [PREPRINTER stage]

Shi et al. 9

than the test results with a maximum diﬀerence of springs, the calculated and test results for the

0.02 for the AW4 loading case. This is due to the trailer car are equivalent and the calculated

point that the theoretical formulas ignore the results are slightly larger than the test results for

dynamic nature of the stiﬀness of air springs at the motor car with a maximum diﬀerence of

diﬀerent rotation speeds and also the inﬂuences about 0.02.

of vertical loading and other suspension compo- 6. The theoretical formulas should consider the

nents are not considered. It can be concluded that dynamic nature of stiﬀness properties and damp-

a laboratory test or ﬁeld test after assembly is ing eﬀect of air springs. The eﬀects of other sus-

essential. pension components should also be considered.

2. In the deﬂated state of the air springs, the calcu- A laboratory test or ﬁeld test after assembly is

lated and test results are equivalent for the case of an essential requirement.

the trailer and the calculated results are slightly 7. The comparison of test and calculated results val-

bigger than test results for the motor car with idates the proposed formulas and allows sources

maximum diﬀerence of about 0.02 which may be of error to be discussed.

due to friction eﬀects that are related to the load-

ing and the speed of the sliding plate.

Funding

This work was supported by the Railway Ministry Science

& Technology Development Project (grant 2012J006-B), the

National Science & Technology Pillar Program (grant

Conclusions 2009BAG12A01), the National Basic Research Program

of China (grant 2011CB711100), and the National Science

The rotation movement between bogie and carbody is & Technology Pillar Program (grant 2011BAG05B04).

studied using vehicle system dynamics theory and for-

mulas for the rotation resistance factor are derived for

diﬀerent air spring states. Laboratory tests are con- References

ducted and the obtained results are compared with 1. Eickhoff BM, Evans JR and Minnis AJ. A review of

calculations. The rotation resistance factor for modelling methods for railway vehicle suspension com-

motor and trailer cars experiencing AW0 and AW4 ponents. Veh Syst Dyn 1995; 24(6-7): 469–496.

loading conditions when air springs are in inﬂated, 2. BS EN14363: 2005. Railway applications-testing

deﬂated and over-inﬂated states are considered so as for the acceptance of running characteristics of railway

to validate the proposed formulas and test and discuss vehicles-testing of running behaviour and stationary

error sources. The following conclusions can be tests.

drawn from the presented studies. 3. Julian S and Evert A. Handbook of railway vehicle

dynamics. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2006,

1. The rotation resistance factor of the bogie is pp.453–454.

4. Simson SA and Pearce ME. Wheel wear losses from

related to the rotation angle and speed. The

bogie rotation resistance, effects of cant and speed. In:

faster the rotation speed, then the greater is the The joint rail conference, Atlanta, GA, USA, April 4–6

rotation resistance factor. The greater the rotation 2006, pp.109–114. ASME.

angle, then the greater is the rotation resistance 5. Simson SA and Pearce ME. Centre bearing rotation

factor. forces during curve transitions. In: Proceedings of the

2. The maximum rotation resistance factor is 0.094 conference on railway engineering: rail achieving growth,

for a trailer car at a rotation speed of 1 deg/s and Melbourne, Australia, 30 April–May 3 2006, pp.71–77.

experiencing AW0 loading conditions and with the Melbourne, Vic.: RTSA.

air springs in the deﬂated state. The maximum 6. Simson SA and Pearce M. Longitudinal impact forces at

rotation resistance factor when the air springs 3 piece bogie center bearings. In: The joint rail confer-

are deﬂated is much greater than that when ence, 16–18 March 2005, pp.45–50. American Society of

Mechanical Engineers, Rail Transportation Division

the air springs are in the inﬂated state for the rota-

RTD, v29, ASME/IEEE.

tion speed of 1 deg/s. The maximum rotation 7. Simson S and Brymer B. Gauge face contact implications

resistance factor obtained at the rotation speed of bogie rotation friction in curving. In: 7th International

of 1 deg/s is much greater than the one obtained Conference on Contact Mechanics and Wear of Rail/

at 0.2 deg/s. Wheel Systems (CM2006), Brisbane, Australia,

3. The rotation resistance factor of the motor car and 4–26 September 2006, pp.549–554. Institute of

trailer car are nearly the same for all cases. Materials Engineering Ltd.

4. The over-inﬂated state of air springs has little inﬂu- 8. Emereole O, Simson S and Brymer B. A parametric

ence on the rotation resistance of the bogie. study of bogie rotation friction management utilizing

5. The calculated results obtained when considering vehicle dynamic simulation. In: Proceedings of the inter-

air springs in inﬂated and over-inﬂated states are national conference on contact mechanics and wear of rail/

wheel systems, 30 April–3 May 2006. Melbourne: RTSA,

slightly smaller than test results with a maximum

Preprint 2006.

diﬀerence of 0.02. For the deﬂated state of the air

XML Template (2013) [16.10.2013–3:47pm] [1–10]

//blrnas3/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIFJ/Vol00000/130128/APPFile/SG-PIFJ130128.3d (PIF) [PREPRINTER stage]

9. Wu H, Robeda J and Guins T. Truck center plate lubri- liners. In: ASME/IEEE 2004 joint rail conference,

cation practice study and recommendations. Research Baltimore, Maryland, USA, April 6–8 2004, pp.63–73.

Report R-966, 2004. Pueblo Colorado: Association of ASME.

American Railroads/Transport Technology Center. 15. Toyofuku K, Yamada C, Kagawa T and Fujita T.

10. Wu H and Robeda J. Effect of bogie center plate lubri- Study on dynamic characteristic analysis of air spring

cation on vehicle curving and lateral stability. Veh Syst with auxiliary chamber. JSAE Rev 1999; 20(3):

Dyn 2004; 41(1): 292–301. 349–355.

11. Zhai PJ, Liu YH and Liu H. Bogie rotate resistance 16. Huang YM and Wang TS. Rotational resistance behav-

calculation method of freight car for railway vehicle ior and field testing of two-axle bogie design. Veh Syst

(in Chinese). Diesel Loco 2011; 2: 21–24. Dyn 1999; 31(1): 47–63.

12. Zhang H. Side bearing friction resistance analysis of 17. Simson S and Brymer B. Laboratory testing of bogie

SW-160 passenger car bogie (in Chinese). J Railw Veh rotation friction with applied track twisting forces. In:

2002; 40(11): 1–4. The conference on railway engineering (CORE 2008),

13. Lacker UB. Investigation into the running of locomo- Perth, Western Australia, 7–10 September 2008.

tives on curves, English translation. Int Railw Congr pp.395–402. Perth, WA: Railway Technical Society of

Assoc Bull 1962; 4: 887–895. Australasia.

14. Katta RR and Conry TF. A dynamic stiffness and

damping model for rail car center plate polymer

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.