4.7 Article

Investigation on longitudinal resistance of the ballasted railway track under vertical load

Journal

CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS
Volume 317, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.126074

Keywords

Longitudinal resistance; Ballasted track; Track stability; Laboratory tests; Continuously welded track

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper investigates the effect of vertical load on the longitudinal resistance of ballasted railway track through experimental and numerical analysis. The study demonstrates the increase in track longitudinal stiffness (TLS) and track longitudinal resistance force (TLRF) with increasing vertical load, and validates the numerical modeling based on experimental results.
The longitudinal resistance of ballasted tracks is due to the longitudinal interaction of rail-fastener and ballastsleeper. Longitudinal resistance is under the effect of various factors as well as the applied vertical load of the running train over the track structure. In this paper, the effect of vertical load on the longitudinal resistance of the ballasted railway track is experimentally and numerically investigated. First, the longitudinal resistance of a 3-m test panel with five B70 concrete sleepers under 0, 100, 200, and 300 kN vertical load were investigated. Second, a three-dimensional model of the track was developed using Abaqus software. Finally, the results of experiments and modeling were compared and the numerical modeling is validated based on tests' results. In each test, track longitudinal stiffness (TLS) and track longitudinal resistance force (TLRF) were calculated. According to laboratory results, TLS was increased by 3.36, 3.63, and 3.83 times with increasing the vertical load as 100, 200, and 300 kN, respectively. In the mentioned order the increment values for TLRF were increased 2.1, 2.74, 2.97 times. Likewise, the numerical results of TLRF for the above-mentioned load order illustrated increasing values as high as 2.1, 2.6, and 2.81 times, respectively.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available