Travelling by rail is considered to be a safe option compared with other types of transport, in terms of the number of accidents. However, there are always opportunities to improve the current safety standards and industrial practices. The aim of this paper is to give a better understanding of the current modelling techniques that could support the design of new railway vehicle structures. The paper highlights the established practices in modelling of proof, fatigue and crashworthiness. It also reviews the state-of-the-art in the modelling of material behaviour, recommends practical modelling solutions that can be used in the railway industry, and demonstrates new modelling techniques for crashworthiness.
GM/RT2100: 2010. Requirements for rail vehicle structures.
2.
GM/RT2400: 2010. Engineering design of on-track machines.
3.
EN 12663-1: 2010. Railway applications – structural requirements of railway vehicle bodies.
4.
EN 15227: 2008. Railway applications – crashworthiness requirements for railway vehicle bodies.
5.
HouJJeronimidisG. A novel bogie design made of glass fibre reinforced plastic. Mater Des2012; 37: 1–7.
6.
ECSS Secretariat. Space engineering. Report ECSS-E-HB-32-20 Parts 1A – 8A. European Cooperation for Space Standardization, Noordwijk, The Netherlands. http://escies.org/ftp/ecss.nl/Handbooks/ (2011, accessed 2 September 2015).
7.
SchutzW. A history of fatigue. Engng Fract Mech1996; 54: 263–300.
8.
KassnerM. Fatigue strength analysis of a welded railway vehicle structure by different methods. Int J Fatigue2012; 34: 103–111.
9.
Bomel Limited. Comparison of fatigue provisions in codes and standards. Report for the Health and Safety Executive. Report No. 2001/083. UK: Health and Safety Executive (HSE), 2002.
10.
BruderTStörzelKBaumgartnerJHanselkaH. Evaluation of nominal and local stress based approaches for the fatigue assessment of seam welds. Int J Fatigue2012; 34: 86–102.
11.
E4501:1995. Railway rolling stock-design method for strength of axles.
12.
EN-13104: 2001. Railway applications-wheelsets and bogies-powered axles-design method.
13.
WagnerVStarkePKerscherEEiflerD. Cyclic deformation behaviour of railway wheel steels in the very high cycle fatigue (VHCF) regime. Int J Fatigue2011; 33: 69–74.
14.
EN 13979-1: 2003+A2: 2011. Railway applications. Wheelsets. Monobloc wheels. Technical approval procedure. Forged and rolled wheels.
15.
Howitt K. Design guide for the calculation of stresses in axles driven by axle hung traction motors. Railfreight Distribution Ltd. Technical Specification BASS 503, November 1996.
16.
LinhartVCernyI. An effect of strength of railway axle steels on fatigue resistance under press fit. Engng Fract Mech2011; 78: 731–741.
17.
BerettaSCarboniMFioreGLo ConteA. Corrosion–fatigue of A1N railway axle steel exposed to rainwater. Int J Fatigue2010; 32: 952–961.
18.
InfanteVBrancoCBritoAMorgadoT. A failure analysis study of cast steel railway couplings used for coal transportation. Engng Fail Anal2003; 10: 475–489.
ZhangJLuLShiozawK. Analysis on fatigue property of microshot peened railway axle steel. Mater Sci Engng A2011; 528: 1615–1622.
21.
MusterHSchmeddersHWickKPradierH. Rail rolling contact fatigue. The performance of naturally hard and head-hardened rails in track. Wear1996; 191: 54–64.
22.
LindenR. Contact region fatigue of railway wheels under combined mechanical rolling pressure and thermal brake loading. Wear1991; 144: 57–70.
23.
TarafMZahafEOussouaddiOZeghloulA. Numerical analysis for predicting the rolling contact fatigue crack initiation in a railway wheel steel. Tribol Int2010; 43: 585–593.
24.
PengDJonesRConstableT. A study into crack growth in a railway wheel under thermal stop brake loading spectrum. Engng Fail Anal2012; 25: 280–290.
25.
SmithKWatsonPTopperT. A stress–strain function for the fatigue of metals. J Mater1970; 5: 767–776.
26.
RingsbergJ. Life prediction of rolling contact fatigue crack initiation. Int J Fatigue2001; 23: 575–586.
27.
Kapoor A. Management and understanding of rolling contact fatigue – literature review. Report no. T355, 2006. London, UK: Rail Safety & Standard Board.
28.
BS 7910: 2013. Guide to methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in metallic structures.
29.
BerettaSCarboniM. Experiments and stochastic model for propagation lifetime of railway axles. Engng Fract Mech2006; 73: 2627–2641.
30.
LukeMVarfolomeevILütkepohlKEsdertsA. Fracture mechanics assessment of railway axles: experimental characterization and computation. Engng Fail Anal2010; 17: 617–623.
31.
EvansA. A statistical analysis of fatal collisions and derailments of passenger trains on British Railways: 1967-1996. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail Rapid Transit1997; 211: 73–86.
32.
LewisJ. Structural crashworthiness – possibilities and practicalities. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail Rapid Transit2002; 216: 117–121.
33.
ABAQUS/Explicit. Theory and analysis user’s manual, version 6.13-2, 2013.
34.
Johnson G and Cook W. A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to large strains, high strain rates and high temperatures. In: The seventh international symposium on ballistics, Hague, The Netherlands, 1983, pp.541–547. Algeria: Bouazoth.
35.
Johnson G, Stryk R, Holmquist T and Beissel S. User instruction for the 1996 version of the EPIC code. Report no. ADA286875, Brooklyn Park, MN: Alliant Techsystems Inc., 1996.
36.
RusinekAZaeraRKlepaczkoJ. Constitutive relations in 3-D for a wide range of strain rates and temperatures – application to mild steels. Int J Solids Struct2007; 44: 5611–5634.
37.
RothCMohrD. Effect of strain rate on ductile fracture initiation in advanced high strength steel sheets: experiments and modeling. Int J Plasticity2014; 56: 19–44.
38.
El-DanafEBaigMAlmajidA. Mechanical, microstructure and texture characterization of API X65 steel. Mater Des2013; 47: 529–538.
39.
SongRDaiQ. Dynamic deformation behavior of dual phase ferritic-martensitic steel at strain rates from 10−4 to 2000 s−1. J Iron Steel Res2013; 20: 48–53.
40.
DeySBorvikTHopperstadOLangsethM. On the influence of fracture criterion in projectile impact of steel plates. Comput Mater Sci2006; 38: 176–191.
41.
DeMandeJPrakashVPereiraJ. Effects of material microstructure on blunt projectile penetration of a nickel-based super alloy. Int J Impact Engng2009; 36: 1027–1043.
42.
SkoglundPNilssonMTjernbergA. Fracture modeling of a high performance armour steel. J Phys IV2006; 134: 197–202.
43.
JonesN. Energy-absorbing effectiveness factor. Int J Impact Engng2010; 37: 754–765.
44.
KotsikosGGrassoM. Damage tolerance of rail vehicle energy absorbers. Procedia – Social Behavioral Sci2012; 48: 1403–1414.
45.
JonesN. Structural impact, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
46.
LewisJRasaiahWScholesA. Validation of measures to improve rail vehicle crashworthiness. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail Rapid Transit1996; 210: 73–85.
47.
SuttonA. The development of railway vehicle crashworthiness. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail Rapid Transit2002; 216: 97–108.
48.
Lewis J. Summary of crush tests on aluminium alloy vehicles ends. Report LR/VST/94/013, 1994, British Railways.
49.
Wilson M and Ricketts B. Validation simulation of new railway rolling stock using the finite element method. In: The fourth European LS-DYNA conference, Ulm, Germany, 22–23 May 2003, pp.B-II-01–B-II-14. Stuttgart-Vaihingen: DYNAlook.
50.
KotsikosGRobinsonMZanganiDRobertsJ. Investigation of the weld unzipping failure mode during collisions of welded aluminium rail vehicles. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail Rapid Transit2008; 222: 59–68.
51.
XueXSchmidFSmithR. Analysis of the structural characteristics of an intermediate rail vehicle and their effect on the vehicle crash performance. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail Rapid Transit2007; 221: 339–352.
52.
SpirkSKemkaVKepkaMMalkovskyZ. Design of a large deformable obstacle for railway crash simulations according to the applicable standard. Appl Comput Mech2012; 6: 83–92.
53.
GarringtonPSmithPYoungA. Ballistic impact testing of steels for the cab of the APT-S. Report TM PDU 75, Derby, UK: British Rail Research Laboratory, 1980.
