4.7 Article

Analysis on dynamic performance of different track transition forms using the discrete element/finite difference hybrid method

期刊

COMPUTERS & STRUCTURES
卷 230, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruc.2019.106187

关键词

Discrete-continuum; Combined simulation; Track transition forms; Track-substructure system; Dynamic performance

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51578469, U1234209]
  2. Research Program of State Key Laboratory of Traction Power [2015TPL-T12]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To analyze the mesodynamic and macrodynamic performance of the track transitions more precisely, a bridge-embankment transition model has been established by combining the discrete element method (DEM) with the finite difference method (FDM). In this model, the DEM is utilized to model sleepers and ballast particles with complex shape, and the FDM is applied to simulate the abutment, transition section and embankment. The DEM/FDM coupled model is then achieved by exchanging displacements, velocities, and contact forces at the interface. Afterwards, the influence of the transition section parameters and transition forms on dynamic behaviour of the track-substructure system is studied under measured rail seat load. The numerical simulations indicate that the increase of the transition section elastic modulus, decrease of the backfill slope values and the transition form of trapezoid backfill following by inverted trapezoid backfill can provide a better displacement gradient between the abutment and the embankment. Additionally, the results show that the inverted trapezoid transition form can provide a better transition of the track dynamic performance than the trapezoid transition form and the embankment soil over the wedge-shape backfill has the tendency to propagate along the slope toward the embankment section under the moving train load for the trapezoid transition form. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据