investigation on the effect of railway track support system characteristics on … ·...
TRANSCRIPT
Investigation on the Effect of Railway Track Support
System Characteristics on the Values of Track Modulus
Mohammad Worya Khordehbinan
Master of Civil Engineering, University of Tehran, Iran, [email protected]; Phone+98-871-3228257
Abstract
In this research, the variation of railway track modulus as a function of ballast layer thickness
and subgrade characteristics is investigated using numerical modeling. Track modulus plays an
essential role in the analysis of railway track systems and is regarded as a basic index of track
response to the train loads. Based on its definition, track modulus is related to the amount of
track vertical deflection. Therefore, it could be expected that the characteristics of track support
system greatly influence the magnitude of the track modulus. Although the importance of the
effect of track modulus on the railway track structural behavior is well recognized, this parameter
has not been investigated thoroughly. The current research is a response to this need. In this
paper, railway track support system is modeled using the finite element approach. The effect of
ballast layer thickness as well as subgrade stiffness on the values of track modulus is evaluated.
Based on the results obtained, discussions are made and suggestions are proposed to improve the
current understanding of track modulus.
Keywords: Track Modulus, Ballast, Subgrade, Railway
INTRODUCTION
Railway track performance is influenced by its components so that it is possible to gain higher
performance by understanding constituent parameters of tracks and modifying them. The most
important factor in analysis of a railway track is estimation of track modulus. In 1994, Cai et al,
described track modulus as proportion factor between rail vertical displacement and vertical
contact pressure between rail bed and foundation beam (underlying components of rail track)
(Boresi, et. al.- 2003)[1, 2]. The same year Selig and Li used more simplified definition as rail
bed module in their calculation and defined it as support force imposing on rail length unit per
rail unit displacement in vertical direction (Selig, et. al.- 1994). In technical text track modulus is
indicated by k and is measured in N/mm, while rail bed modulus is represented by u and is
measured in Pa. In addition to above mentioned difference, the main difference between track
modulus and rail bed modulus is that track modulus (k) takes effects of rail dimensions and
material, i.e., flexural stiffness indicating by EI, into consideration, while u depends on other
components of superstructure (such as rail joints to sleeper as well as sleeper itself) and
underlayment (ballast and sub-ballast and their underlying soil layer) and in whatever underlying
the rail and being considered as its support subgrade, and is independent from rail type. Rail bed
modulus is very important and has a direct relationship with performance level, rail track safety,
and amount of needed repair and maintenance. If rail bed modulus is low and/or its change in a
given length of track is excessive, it leads to undesired consequences. Ebersohn et al, (1993)
concluded that, if rail bed modulus is low, it leads to different settlement along track, and
therefore the need for maintenance operations increases (Ebersohn et al, 1993)[3]. On the other
hand, Zarembski and Palese (2003) argued that if the variation of rail bed modulus is too high, as
in bridges vicinity and slab tracks, dynamic forces imposed on track increase (Zarembski et. al.-
2003) [4]. Increasing dynamic forces leads to track component lifetime reduction and
subsequently, maintenance periods reduce. It is proven that reduction of rail bed modulus
variation in railway and road level crossing results in railway performance improvement and
maintenance operation reduction. Quality level of passengers and comfort specified by vertical
acceleration is another factor which is highly dependent to rail bed modulus quality. The above
mentioned discussion indicates the importance of accurate track stiffness determination and rail
bed modulus estimation. Different methods have been proposed by authors for measurement and
calculation of rail bed modulus. Generally, as it is shown in Fig.1 they can be classified into 3
major groups: theoretical, theoretical-exprimental and experimental. Hay (1953), Birmann and
Luber (1965- 1966) in Germany, Prause et al, (1974), Ahlf (1975) and West Australia Railway
(Westrail) (1976) performed some research in order to analyze track stiffness by theoretical and
experimental methods. All these researches on track stiffness and track modulus specification are
limited to case studies. So far, in all research, different levels of thickness of ballast layer role
and railway track subgrade condition have been considered generally [5]. Understanding rail
behavior and its bed modulus are important for track control and operation. (In this paper, it is
given for different possible kinds of single rail track systems.) Various factors are involved in
determining track modulus, thus regarding variability of these factors and their interaction as
well as dynamic nature of forces, determining rail bed modulus is difficult and complex and
requires extensive study. Therefore, it is necessary to find a technique for estimation bed
modulus which includes all factors. In this paper, track modulus is determined via field test in
Tehran-Mashhad railway track (in Iranian railways) performed by Railway Research Center.
Then, by use of finite element as an effective method in mechanical analysis of each component
of railway system, an optimal model of railway track is designed and is calibrated using field
test. Track modulus is analyzed under different thickness levels of ballast layer, different types of
bed, passing speed and axial load. Results of analysis are studied by Ansys software in order to
determine track modulus. Finally the following diagram is presented for various types of railway
tracks under ballast layer thickness and bed type in order to determine bed modulus and control
vertical displacement of railway track.
Fig.1. Classification of methods for measurement of rail bed stiffness and Track Modulus
TRACK SYSTEM ANALYSIS METHODS
Field test and numerical analysis by finite element method is used in order to track behavior
analysis. Field test is performed by Railway Research Center of Iran under leadership of Dr.
Mohammadzade, and results of this test are used by authors for further study. In numerical
analysis, the model having the most consistency with field test data is obtained based on finite
element method by using trial and error process. Then, modeling and analysis by software is
performed for various conditions of track. Sensitivity is also analyzed. Then a clear
conclusion is represented on the extent and amount of effects of different parameters on rail
bed modulus by drawing a diagram and appropriated tables
Methods of measurement of rail bed modulus
Theoretical methods Theoretical-experimental methods
experimental methods
Pyramid model AREMA bylaw model
Method proposed by Talbot
Beam on elastic subgarde model
Method of Academy of Railway Science of China
Method Nebraska University
Method of Technical University of Delft
Method USA Transportation Technology Center
Field Test Method
Field test was performed in track 4 of Bahram station (between Rey and Varamin stations in
Tehran-Mashhad railway line) which has subgrade of sandy soil type with high quality. Track
system was loaded by 20-ton axle load and passing velocities of 3.4 km/h and 6.88 km/h before
and after track tamping and stabilization.
Tests were performed in two stages by placing 7 force measuring tools and 6 displacement meter
sensors in three track sleepers in order to record forces imposed on rail bed and track vertical
displacement. In the first stage, track response was recorded by 6-axle diesel and 4-axle wagon
passing. Then, stabilization and tamping operations were performed in railway track, and by
reloading track by diesel and loaded wagon, track response was assessed. Figure (3) indicates
sensors evaluation of three sleeper’s vertical displacement under different rail supporting system
and track loading conditions.
b. base placed in track for performing test
a. Test location
d. Track stabilizer machine
c. Track tamping machine
e. six -axle diesel with wagon for track loading
Fig 2: Field test details
a. Before tamping (Train speed = 3/4 km/h)
b. After tamping and stabilization (Train speed = 6/88 km/h)
Fig 3: sleeper vertical displacement under diesel passing
Numerical Analysis Method
"Catia" and "Ansys" software were used in this study for modeling and model sensitivity
analysis. Dimensions of initial model were changed by using trial and error process so that the
method with lowest results discrepancy with track superstructure system in field study is
selected. Technical and general characteristics of track system constituents were specified based
on international standards so that they can be used as input data for modeling. Thus, mechanical
characteristics and behavior of system elements were studied and then track system was modeled
based on obtained data. Model accuracy is controlled by field test results as well as track
elements’ geometric characteristics. Sub-ballast layer thickness is assumed constant and as 10
cm in this study. B70 single-block prestressed concrete sleeper is selected with 260 cm length, 24
cm width and 15 cm height. Sleeper effective length is the modeling basis. Sleepers spacing and
their compressive strength is considered as 60cm and 600 kg/cm2 respectively. Rail type in
modeling is UIC60 characteristics.
Technical and general characteristics of ballasted railway track system components which are
used as basic parameters in modeling are classified according to table (1) [5, 6].
Table 1. Mechanical characteristics of ballasted track Components [5]
Materials Type Elasticity modulus
(kg/cm2) Poisson’s ratio
Adhesion
(kg/cm2) Friction angle
poor Subgrade (S1) 125 0.4 0.15 10
Fair Subgrade (S2) 250 0.3 0.1 20
good Subgrade (S3) 800 0.3 0 30
Rocky subgrage (R) 30000 0.2 15 20
Ballast 1300 0.2 0 45
Sandy subballast 2000 0.3 0 35
After modeling and analysis, model is calibrated in order to agree with railway track field test
state. Then developed models are analyzed and the model having lowest discrepancy with field
test state is selected as the main model for numerical analysis. Table (2) indicates section
characteristics of track tested for theory modeling [3, 5, 6].
Table 2. Track system parameter values with regard to field study in modeling
Parameter Track system Parameter Track system
Sleeper moment of inertia (cm4) 24200 Elastic modulus of bed (kg/cm2) 1240
Rail moment of inertia (cm4) 3950 Elastic modulus of Subballast (kg/cm2) 1260
Ballast thickness (cm) 38 Elastic modulus of ballast (kg/cm2) 2490
Subballast thickness (cm) 15.2 Elastic modulus of Sleeper (kg/cm2) 2.07×105
Wheel load (Ton) 14.2 Elastic modulus of rail (kg/cm2) 2.07×106
Sleeper length(cm) 259 Bed Poisson’s ratio 0.4
Sleeper width(mm) 229 Ballast layer Poisson’s ratio 0.4
Sleepers spacing (cm) 61 Sleeper Poisson’s ratio 0.3
Rail area (cm2) 86.5 Rail Poisson’s ratio 0.25
Sub-ballast Poisson’s ratio 0.3
Results of field study and theoretical model analyses have discrepancy. Model having lowest
acceptable discrepancy in data output with real state is presented in figure (4). Track length is
determined in model by considering load distribution principle. if wheel load is directly put on
one sleeper, that sleeper tolerates 40% of load and first adjacent sleepers and second adjacent
sleepers each tolerate 23% and 7% of the load, respectively. Thus the impact on third and fourth
and nth sleeper would be insignificant. Therefore, in each wheel load, 5 sleepers with perfect
symmetry have impact along rail. Regarding the model design condition, adjacent loads’ overlap
effect under good safety factor is ignored in modeling. Sleeper length in model is one third of
total sleeper length. Model boundary condition is assumed with regard to the fact that model has
symmetry along rail and sleeper, thus symmetry principle is assumed in mentioned directions. In
two other directions, one in track shoulder model is thoroughly free and in rail direction, model
plane lacks any displacement in direction vertical to plane. Degree of freedom is considered as
zero in lower plate.
Fig 4: Simulated Track System Model
There is 1 to 6 percent discrepancy between results of model analysis and field test
measurements which is justified regarding to field condition.
Table 3. Comparing result of field study and theoretical modeling [5]
Ballast surface strain
Bed surfaceModel
displacement(mm)Stress (kPa) 0.001550.8570Field state 0.001440.8971Theoretical state
6 4.71.4Discrepancy percent (%)
Axle and traffic load passing over the track are among critical factors of track and bed fatigue.
Based on track equipment, different amounts of axle load would be applied on different tracks.
Axle loads are 16 and 18 tons respectively for passenger tracks with maximum speed of 160
km/h and 20 and 25 tones for freight tracks with maximum speed of 100 km/h. Forces which are
imposed on railway track are mainly dynamic in nature. However, precise prediction of dynamic
forces imposing on railway tracks is difficult. On the other hand, more simplification of railway
track analysis and design process is necessary. Thus for design purpose, static vertical force
imposing from the wheel is multiplied by a factor termed as dynamic impact factor and quasi
static force used in railway track design is obtained. By applying dynamic impact factor in static
loads, effects of factors which have not been considered in simplifications are taken into account.
Some of these effects include track geometric characteristics, its quality, stiffness and
components, railway vehicle characteristic such as wheels type, load magnitude, and finally
speed, braking and vehicle acceleration increase and decrease. Different relations have been
proposed for calculating dynamic impact factor by different institutes and researchers based on
above mentioned factors. Regarding dominant condition of operation (including speed and axial
load) load factor of each axle is calculated independently for different loads by AREMA method.
Wheel diameter is assumed 920 mm in this study. Axle load on railway tracks is calculated for
each wheel (P) based on wagons condition in Iran and by selecting appropriate impact factor
( ). In this study, loading is performed by gradual method and pre-loading of 17.5% of imposed
load.
ANALYSIS OF RAILWAY TRACK MODULUS
Analysis of Field Test Result
Results of field test in stabilized sandy subgrade condition (high quality) for rail supporting
system in track 4 of Bahram station (between Rey and Varamin stations in Tehran-Mashhad
railway track) is given in table (4).
Result analysis in field test shows that under axle load of 20 tons, the maximum change in
sleeper vertical settlement and track modulus before tamping shows 54% decrease and
337.5% increase, respectively, compared to after track tamping and stabilization, and more
than 3 times increase respectively compared to after track tamping and stabilization.
According to researches on Iran railway tracks, track mechanical parameters become
heterogonous and track stiffness reduces due to track deterioration and track behavior departs
from beam behavior on Elastic bed and sleeper vertical displacement may increase threefold,
which by tamping and track stabilization track shows uniform behavior as its stiffness
increases [7, 8].
Table 4. Rail bed modulus in Field Test
Rail bed Modulus (MPa) Track system characteristics
Sleeper 3 Sleeper 2 Sleeper 1
35.06 23.964 17.20 Before tamping
54.78 53.62 57.24 After tamping and stabilization of track
Analysis of Finite Element Method Result
By model analysis based on rail displacement result in vertical direction, track modulus
values in terms of ballast layer thickness, subgrade quality and under different loadings which
is shown diagrammatically in figure (5).
Fig 5: Rail bed Modulus in terms of ballast layer thickness and loading condition
Analysis result of track modulus shows that the type of passenger and freight tracks do not
have effect in specifying this important design parameter, and has direct relationship with
ballast layer thickness in constant condition. Regarding the fact that subgrade type changes
along railway track line, impact of subgrade type change is expressed by four qualities (S1,
S2, S3 and R) as track modulus increase percent in table (5).
Table 5. Effect of change in type of bed on track modulus value
Type of subgrade change Track modulus increase
percent Type of subgrade change
Track modulus increase percent
Subgrade 1 to subgrade 2 11.81 Subgrade 1 to subgrade 3 44.1 Subgrade 2 to subgrade 3 28.86 Subgrade 2 to subgrade 4 59.3 Subgrade 3 to subgrade 4 23.62 Subgrade 1 to subgrade 4 78.11
Table 5 indicates that improving quality of subgrade can increase bed modulus by 12 to 78
percent. Regarding dependency of rail bed modulus to ballast layer thickness, percent of
increase in bed modulus due to change in this parameter is given in table 6.
Table 6. Percent of increase in rail bed modulus with additional in ballast layer thickness
Extent of increase in ballast layer thickness +5cm +10cm +15cm +20cm
20
30
40
50
60
70
25 30 35 40 45 50
Ballast layer Thickness (cm)
Tra
ck
mo
du
lus
(M
Pa
)
Axial load: 16 Tons Axial load: 18 Tons
Axial load: 20 Tons Axial load: 25 Tons
R
S3
s1
s2
Percent average of increase in rail bed modulus 0.93 1.72 2.6 3.77
In order to determine track modulus in terms of ballast layer thickness and bed Elasticity
modulus in general condition of Iran railway tracks some curves are represented in figure (6).
In order to maintain good railway track performance under traffic load and with regard to
field test performed in Iran railway tracks (in Tehran-Mashhad railway line), rail bed modulus
level may change to 70% in ballast layer retamping and restabilaztion interval which should
be accounted.
Fig 6: Rail bed modulus in terms of bed modulus of elasticity and ballast layer thickness
Track modulus as average for one loading cycle and subgrade condition with four classified
qualities (S1, S2, S3 and R) is obtained as follows:
subgrade type ONE: 32 MPa, subgrade type TWO: 36 MPa, subgrade type THREE: 46MPa,
subgrade type FOUR: 57MPa; these values decrease with regard to field traffic condition and
track repair and maintenance interval (tamping and stabilization). Table 7 gives effect of rail
bed modulus on maximum rail vertical displacement.
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
100 1000 10000 100000
Bed Elastic Modulus (kg/cm2)
Tra
ck M
od
ulu
s (M
Pa)
Ballast thickness: 30 cm
Ballast thickness: 35 cm
Ballast thickness: 40 cm
Ballast thickness: 45 cm
Ballast thickness: 50 cm
Table 7. Effect of change in track modulus on maximum vertical displacement of rail
Track modulus
Percent of track modulus increase
maximum vertical displacement of rail (mm)
Percent of decrease in maximum vertical displacement of rail
Speed: 160km/h Speed: 100km/h Speed: 160km/h Speed: 100km/h Maximum axial passing load (ton)
16 18 20 25 16 18 20 25 32 0 1.27 1.54 1.41 1.76 0 0 0 0 36 12.5 1.23 1.28 1.26 1.57 10.26 10.29 10.16 10.07 46 42.75 0.99 1.11 1.02 1.27 27.69 27.69 27.72 27.72 57 78.125 0.84 0.95 0.78 1.09 38.24 38.18 38.17 38.08
According to this table it can be said that increase in track modulus leads to decrease in
vertical displacement due to imposing load of vehicles’ wheels in rail section.
CONCLUSION
In this paper, regarding the condition of different components of track in building and
operation of track superstructure which lead to change in track modulus extent, it was
attempted to study the effect of these changes on track modulus extent in field test and
numerical analysis. Result analysis in field test suggests that, under axle load of 20 tons, the
maximum change in sleeper vertical settlement and Track modulus before tamping shows
54% decrease and 337.5% increase, respectively, compared to after track tamping and
stabilization. In numerical analysis method, proposed track superstructure model by the aid of
Ansys software was calibrated based on field test, and track modulus was specified under
different conditions of loading. Analysis of results indicated the extent of effects of various
parameters on track modulus. Generally vertical displacement of rail decreases by increasing
rail bed modulus, decreasing train speed or axle load of rail-borne vehicles. Also, results show
that increasing track modulus with improvement of subgrade quality by 11 to 80% can be
varied, and changes in ballast layer thickness can improve track modulus by 0.93 to 3.77%.
As findings show, type of subgrade quality and ballast layer thickness does not have any main
effect on percent of vertical displacement of rail. It can be said that rail bed modulus varies
by increase in ballast layer thickness and bed layer quality. It increases by increase in bed soil
quality and elastic modulus. Finally regarding obtained results in terms of ballast layer
thickness and bed elastic modulus as two main parameters influencing rail bed modulus, it is
possible to determine track modulus with regard to repair and maintenance conditions as
indicated in field tests.
REFRENCES
[1] Sadeghi J., “Fundamentals of analysis and design of railway ballasted track”, Iran University of Science
and Technology Publication, Tehran, Iran, 2009.
[2] Boresi, Arthur P., Schmidt, Richard J., "Advanced Mechanics of Materials", 6th Edition. John Wiley &
Sons, New York, NY: Chap. 5, 10., 2003.
[3] Ebersohn, W., Trevizo, M. C., Selig, E. T., (1993), “Effect of Low Track Modulus on Track
Performance,” International Heavy Haul Association, Proc. of Fifth International Heavy Haul Conference pp.
379-388.
[4] Zarembski, A. M. Palese, J., “Transitions Eliminate Impact at Crossings”, Railway Track and Structures.
August issue, 2003.
[5] Khordehbinan, M. W. , “Sensitive Analysis of Granular layers of Rail Support system in the Ballasted
Railway Tracks of Iran”, Master of Science dissertation, University of Tehran, 2009.
[6] Prause, R. H., Meacham, H. C., “Assessment of Design Tools and Criteria for Urban Rail Track
Structures”, vol. 1, At-Grade, Battlle Columbus Laboratories, UMTA Report No. UMTA-MA-06 National
Technical Information Service, Virginia, USA,1974.
[7] Doyle, N.F., “Railway Track Design: A review of current practice”, Occasional paper no. 35, Bureau of
Transport Economics, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 1980.
[8] Selig E. T., Waters J. M, "Track geotechnology and substructure management", University of
Massachusetts, USA.,1994.
[9] Manual for Railway Track Engineering, Vol.1, Chapter 1, part 2, "Roadway and Ballast- ballast",
American Railway Engineering and maintenance of way Association, 2006.
[10] Moghdasnejad, F., Research project, “ Determinate ballast thickness in the Tracks of Iran”, Railway
Research Center, Tehran, Iran, 2004.
[11] Mohammadzade, S., Ataei, SH., Research project, “ Field Test in Tracks 4 and 5 of Tehran- Qom”,
Railway Research Center, Tehran, Iran, 2004.
[12] Esveld C. "Modern railway track". 2nd ed. The Netherlands: MRT Publication; 2001.
[13] Kaewunruen, S., Remennikov, A.M., "Field trials for dynamic characteristics of railway track and its
components using impact excitation technique", NDT & E International, Vol.40, pp 510-519, 2007.
[14] Selig, E. T., Li, D., “Track Modulus: Its meaning and Factors Influencing It,” Transportation Research
Record 1470, pp. 47-54. USA.,1994
[15] Zakeri J. A. and Sadeghi J., (2007), "Field Investigation of Load Distribution on Railway Track
Sleepers", Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, V21-NO. 12, PP 1948-1956.
[16] Sadeghi J. and Khordehbinan M., “Investigation on Influences of Rail Support System on Railway
Track Structural Behavior”, Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol-1, PP 79-88, 2009.
[17] Al Shaer, A., Duhamel, D., Saba, K., Foret, K., Schmitt, L., " Experimental settlement and dynamic
behavior of a portion of ballasted railway track under high speed trains", Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol.
316, pp. 211–233, April 2008.
[18] Esveld C. "Modern railway track". 2nd ed. The Netherlands: MRT Publication; 2001.
[19] Kaewunruen, S., Remennikov, A.M., "Field trials for dynamic characteristics of railway track and its
components using impact excitation technique", NDT & E International, Vol.40, pp 510-519, 2007.
[20] Selig, E. T., Li, D., “Track Modulus: Its meaning and Factors Influencing It,” Transportation Research
Record 1470, pp. 47-54. USA.,1994
[21] Sadeghi J. and Kohoutek R., “Analytical modeling of railway track system,” Rail Track Journal, No. 10,
1995, pp 67-81.
[22] Zakeri J. A. and Xia H., “Sensitivity Analysis of Track Parameters on Train- Track Dynamic
Interaction", Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, V22-NO. 7, PP 1299-1304, 2008.
[23] Manual for Railway Track Engineering, Vol.1, Chapter 1, part 2, "Roadway and Ballast- ballast",
American Railway Engineering and maintenance of way Association, 2006.