4.5 Article

Experimental Study on the Stability of Railroad Silt Subgrade with Increasing Train Speed

Journal

Publisher

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000282

Keywords

Increasing speed; Subgrade; Silt; Stability

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [50678020]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The comfort and safety of a moving train is largely determined by the dynamic response of the railway track and its foundation (i.e., subgrade). To study the dynamic stability of a silt subgrade subjected to train traffic loading with increasing speed, cyclic triaxial tests were conducted for compacted silt specimens with varying dry density, water content, dynamic stress, and load frequency. The laboratory test results and field measurements of the subgrade dynamic stress under train loading indicate that with increasing train speed, an increase in dynamic stress and load frequency does not impair the stability of the silt subgrade, provided the subgrade is in sound physical condition (i.e., its natural water content approximates the optimal water content) and the relative compaction is at least 90%. However, if the relative compaction is 85%, the subgrade is stable only at a dynamic stress level that is below 70 kPa, and the subgrade may suffer shear failure at a higher dynamic stress level. The elastic deformation of the subgrade linearly increases with an increase in train speed. However, if the degree of saturation of the silt subgrade increases, the thresholds of both the dynamic stress and resilient modulus decrease markedly, accompanied by sharp increases in elastic deformation and cumulative deformation and can even result in the shear failure of the subgrade. These conditions are unfavorable for the high speeds and stability needed for trains; therefore, train speeds should be limited in wet conditions to reduce subgrade dynamic stress and load frequency.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available