Effect of gauge corner lubrication on wheel/rail non-Hertzian contact and rail surface damage on the curves
doi: 10.1007/s10409-022-09002-x
-
摘要: 由于受到列车运营环境(轮轨黏着状态和车-线耦合振动)的影响, 轮轨系统动态相互作用呈现显著的非线性特征, 其对轮轨表面磨耗和疲劳伤损的研究至关重要. 在地铁曲线线路上, 为缓解高轨轨距角异常磨耗, 普遍安装了轨距角润滑装置. 本文从数值仿真的角度, 分析了在曲线上轨距角润滑对轮轨非赫兹接触和钢轨表面疲劳损伤的影响. 基于车-线耦合动力学理论, 建立了地铁车辆-板式轨道三维耦合动力学模型, 模型中考虑了一种精确的非赫兹轮轨滚动接触模型. 分析了轨距角润滑对轮轨蠕滑、接触应力、黏-滑分布以及钢轨表面疲劳损伤的影响. 数值研究表明, 在曲线线路上轨距角润滑对轮轨滚动接触影响显著; 另一方面, 轨距角润滑可显著降低轮轨摩擦系数, 从而可进一步缓解钢轨表面疲劳损伤.Abstract: Wheel/rail rolling contact is a highly nonlinear issue affected by the complicated operating environment (including adhesion conditions and motion attitude of train and track system), which is a fundamental topic for further insight into wheel/rail tread wear and rolling contact fatigue (RCF). The rail gauge corner lubrication (RGCL) devices have been installed on the metro outer rail to mitigate its wear on the curved tracks. This paper presents an investigation into the influence of RGCL on wheel/rail non-Hertzian contact and rail surface RCF on the curves through numerical analysis. To this end, a metro vehicle-slab track interaction dynamics model is extended, in which an accurate wheel/rail non-Hertzian contact algorithm is implemented. The influence of RGCL on wheel/rail creep, contact stress and adhesion-slip distributions and fatigue damage of rail surface are evaluated. The simulation results show that RGCL can markedly affect wheel/rail contact on the tight curves. It is further suggested that RGCL can reduce rail surface RCF on tight curves through the wheel/rail low-friction interactions.
-
4. Spatial trace line and initial contact point of wheel/rail contact under different yaw angle of wheelset: a Ψ =
0 deg and b Ψ =2 deg. 
5. Wheel/rail normal contact considering the yaw angle [18]: a pressure distribution and b contact patch.
7. Comparison results include the running velocity and vertical vibrations of the axlebox.
8. Outer and inner wheel/rail contact points on rail profile under the a coasting condition without RGCL, b coasting condition with RGCL, c traction condition without RGCL and d traction condition with RGCL. .
9. Dynamic responses of wheel/rail longitudinal creepage under the a coasting condition and b traction condition.
10. Dynamic responses of wheel/rail longitudinal creep force under the a coasting condition and b traction condition.
11. Pressure distributions of the outer and inner wheel/rail contact under the a coasting condition without RGCL, b coasting condition with RGCL, c traction condition without RGCL and d traction condition with RGCL.
13. Direction distributions of the shear stresses acting on rail surface of the outer and inner wheel/rail contact under the a coasting condition without RGCL, b coasting condition with RGCL, c traction condition without RGCL and d traction condition with RGCL.
14. Dynamic responses of global fatigue indexes (TFI) under the a coasting condition and b traction condition.
15. Energy dissipation distributions of the outer and inner wheel/rail contact under the a coasting condition without RGCL, b coasting condition with RGCL, c traction condition without RGCL and d traction condition with RGCL.
16. Fatigue index distributions of the outer and inner wheel/rail contact under the a coasting condition without RGCL, b coasting condition with RGCL, c traction condition without RGCL and d traction condition with RGCL.
17. Effect of RGCL on rail surface RCF with different curve radius: a coasting condition and b traction condition.
19. Effect of RGCL on rail surface RCF with different friction coefficient: a coasting condition and b traction condition.
12. Shear stress distributions of the outer and inner wheel/rail contact under the a coasting condition without RGCL, b coasting condition with RGCL, c traction condition without RGCL and d traction condition with RGCL.
21. Comparison of rail surface RCF with different lubrication conditions: a outer rail and b inner rail.
Table 1. Key parameters for the dynamics model
Notation Specification Value Mc Carbody mass (kg) 32000 Mt Bogie frame mass (kg) 2500 Mw Wheelset mass (kg) 1276 Icx Roll moment of inertia of cabody (kg m2) 50977 Icy Pitch moment of inertia of cabody (kg m2) 986316 Icz Yaw moment of inertia of cabody (kg m2) 987952 Itx Roll moment of inertia of bogie frame (kg m2) 1083 Ity Pitch moment of inertia of bogie frame (kg m2) 417 Itz Yaw moment of inertia of bogie frame (kg m2) 1044 Iwx Roll moment of inertia of wheelset (kg m2) 580 Iwy Pitch moment of inertia of wheelset (kg m2) 50 Iwz Yaw moment of inertia of wheelset (kg m2) 580 Kpx, Cpx Longitudinal stiffness (kN/m) and damping (kN s/m) of primary suspension 5200, 5.0 Kpy, Cpy Lateral stiffness (kN/m) and damping (kN s/m) of primary suspension 5200, 5.0 Kpz, Cpz Vertical stiffness (kN/mm) and damping (kN s/m) of primary suspension 2500, 20 Ksx, Csx Longitudinal stiffness (kN/m) and damping (kN s/m) of secondary suspension 250, 20 Ksy, Csy Lateral stiffness (kN/m) and damping (kN s/m) of secondary suspension 250, 20 Ksz, Csz Vertical stiffness (kN/mm) and damping (kN s/m) of secondary suspension 600, 80 lc Half distance of the two wheelsets in bogie (m) 5.03 lt Half distance of two bogies (m) 1.0 dw Lateral half distance between primary suspension 1.05 ds Lateral half distance between secondary suspension 1.05 Rw Wheel radius (m) 0.42 mr Mass of rail per unit length (kg/m) 60.64 Er Elastic modulus of rail (GPa) 209 υr Poisson ratio of track rail 0.3 ρr Density of rail (kg/m3) 7860 Ar Cross-sectional area of rail (cm2) 77.45 Es Elastic modulus of track slab (GPa) 36.5 υs Poisson ratio of track slab 0.2 ls Longitudinal distance of the adjacent fasteners (m) 0.6 Ls, Ws and Hs Length, width and thickness of track slab (m) 9, 3.15 and 0.5 Kfx, Cfx Longitudinal stiffness (MN/m) and damping (kN s/m) of fastener 10, 10 Kfy, Cfy Lateral stiffness (MN/m) and damping (kN s/m) of fastener 20, 50 Kfz, Cfz Vertical stiffness (MN/m) and damping (kN s/m) of fastener 40, 50 Ksbz, Csbz Vertical stiffness (MN/m3) and damping (kN s/m3) of CA mortar per unit area 1250, 40 
下载: 导出CSV
Table 2. Key parameters for the curves and curve negotiation velocities
Curve radius (m) Superelevation (mm) Traveling velocity (km/h) 300 120 56 400 105 60 500 100 65 600 95 69.5 700 70 65 800 66 66.5 1000 58 70
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] W. Zhai, X. Jin, Z. Wen, and X. Zhao, Wear problems of high-speed wheel/rail systems: Observations, causes, and countermeasures in China, Appl. Mech. Rev. 72, 060801 (2020). [2] L. Jing, K. Wang, and W. Zhai, Impact vibration behavior of railway vehicles: a state-of-the-art overview, Acta Mech. Sin. 37, 1193 (2021). [3] N. Burgelman, Z. Li, and R. Dollevoet, A new rolling contact method applied to conformal contact and the train-turnout interaction, Wear 321, 94 (2014). [4] S. S. Ding, Q. Li, A. Q. Tian, J. Du, and J. L. Liu, Aerodynamic design on high-speed trains, Acta Mech. Sin. 32, 215 (2016). [5] S. R. Lewis, R. Lewis, G. Evans, and L. E. Buckley-Johnstone, Assessment of railway curve lubricant performance using a twin-disc tester, Wear 314, 205 (2014). [6] V. Reddy, G. Chattopadhyay, P. O. Larsson-Kråik, and D. J. Hargreaves, Modelling and analysis of rail maintenance cost, Int. J. Prod. Eco. 105, 475 (2007). [7] C. Hardwick, R. Lewis, and D. T. Eadie, Wheel and rail wear—Understanding the effects of water and grease, Wear 314, 198 (2014). [8] W. J. Wang, R. Lewis, B. Yang, L. C. Guo, Q. Y. Liu, and M. H. Zhu, Wear and damage transitions of wheel and rail materials under various contact conditions, Wear 362-363, 146 (2016). [9] H. Chen, S. Fukagai, Y. Sone, T. Ban, and A. Namura, Assessment of lubricant applied to wheel/rail interface in curves, Wear 314, 228 (2014). [10] Y. Li, Z. Ren, R. Enblom, S. Stichel, and G. Li, Wheel wear prediction on a high-speed train in China, Vehicle Syst. Dyn. 58, 1839 (2019). [11] E. Butini, L. Marini, M. Meacci, E. Meli, A. Rindi, X. J. Zhao, and W. J. Wang, An innovative model for the prediction of wheel-Rail wear and rolling contact fatigue, Wear 436-437, 203025 (2019). [12] Y. Ye, Y. Sun, D. Shi, B. Peng, and M. Hecht, A wheel wear prediction model of non-Hertzian wheel-rail contact considering wheelset yaw: Comparison between simulated and field test results, Wear 474-475, 203715 (2021). [13] O. Arias-Cuevas, Z. Li, R. I. Popovici, and D. J. Schipper, Simulation of curving behaviour under high traction in lubricated wheel-rail contacts, Vehicle Syst. Dyn. 48, 299 (2010). [14] G. I. Alarcón, N. Burgelman, J. M. Meza, A. Toro, and Z. Li, The influence of rail lubrication on energy dissipation in the wheel/rail contact: A comparison of simulation results with field measurements, Wear 330-331, 533 (2015). [15] S. A. Khan, I. Persson, J. Lundberg, and C. Stenström, Prediction of top-of-rail friction control effects on rail RCF suppressed by wear, Wear 380-381, 106 (2017). [16] B. Liu, S. Bruni, and E. Vollebregt, A non-Hertzian method for solving wheel-rail normal contact problem taking into account the effect of yaw, Vehicle Syst. Dyn. 54, 1226 (2016). [17] B. Zhu, J. Zeng, D. Zhang, and Y. Wu, A non-Hertzian wheel-rail contact model considering wheelset yaw and its application in wheel wear prediction, Wear 432-433, 202958 (2019). [18] Y. Sun, W. Zhai, Y. Ye, L. Zhu, and Y. Guo, A simplified model for solving wheel-rail non-Hertzian normal contact problem under the influence of yaw angle, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 174, 105554 (2020). [19] W. M.Zhai, Vehicle-Track Coupled Dynamics (Springer, Singapore, 2020) [20] Y. Yang, X. Guo, Y. Sun, L. Ling, T. Zhang, K. Wang, and W. Zhai, Non-Hertzian contact analysis of heavy-haul locomotive wheel/rail dynamic interactions under changeable friction conditions, Vehicle Syst. Dyn. 1 (2021). [21] L. Ling, X. B. Xiao, and X. S. Jin, Development of a simulation model for dynamic derailment analysis of high-speed trains, Acta Mech. Sin. 30, 860 (2014). [22] N. Burgelman, M. S. Sichani, R. Enblom, M. Berg, Z. Li, and R. Dollevoet, Influence of wheel-rail contact modelling on vehicle dynamic simulation, Vehicle Syst. Dyn. 53, 1190 (2014). [23] J. Piotrowski, and W. Kik, A simplified model of wheel/rail contact mechanics for non-Hertzian problems and its application in rail vehicle dynamic simulations, Vehicle Syst. Dyn. 46, 27 (2008). [24] X. Quost, M. Sebes, A. Eddhahak, J. B. Ayasse, H. Chollet, P. E. Gautier, and F. Thouverez, Assessment of a semi-Hertzian method for determination of wheel-rail contact patch, Vehicle Syst. Dyn. 44, 789 (2006). [25] E. Meli, S. Magheri, and M. Malvezzi, Development and implementation of a differential elastic wheel-rail contact model for multibody applications, Vehicle Syst. Dyn. 49, 969 (2011). [26] M. S. Sichani, R. Enblom, and M. Berg, A novel method to model wheel-rail normal contact in vehicle dynamics simulation, Vehicle Syst. Dyn. 52, 1752 (2014). [27] M. Spiryagin, M. Sajjad, D. Nielsen, Y. Q. Sun, D. Raman, and G. Chattopadhyay, Research methodology for evaluation of top-of-rail friction management in Australian heavy haul networks, Proc. Instit. Mech. Eng. Part F-J. Rail Rapid Transit 228, 631 (2013). [28] M. S. Sichani, R. Enblom, and M. Berg, A fast wheel-rail contact model for application to damage analysis in vehicle dynamics simulation, Wear 366-367, 123 (2016). [29] U. Spangenberg, R. D. Fröhling, and P. S. Els, Influence of wheel and rail profile shape on the initiation of rolling contact fatigue cracks at high axle loads, Vehicle Syst. Dyn. 54, 638 (2016). [30] S. Hossein-Nia, M. S. Sichani, S. Stichel, and C. Casanueva, Wheel life prediction model—An alternative to the FASTSIM algorithm for RCF, Vehicle Syst. Dyn. 56, 1051 (2018). -
下载:
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 53
- HTML全文浏览量: 62
- PDF下载量: 0
- 被引次数: 0
京公网安备 11010502036328号 京ICP备17033152号