The derailment behaviour of trains following a collision is a critical factor in driving safety. This paper builds upon the existing train collision dynamics model by integrating a finite-length Euler beam track model with elastic point support and a wheel-rail interaction solver. It employs a modified explicit double-step method for computation. The enhanced model and algorithm are utilized to examine train derailment post-collision. A specialized program for collision calculations is developed, with its accuracy and stability confirmed through comparison with finite element analyses. In determining train derailment, the dynamic model adopts a criterion from finite element simulations. It sets a threshold where the lifting height of at least two wheelsets on the same vehicle must not exceed 50% of the nominal flange height, and these wheelsets must not be on the same bogie. The model further investigates the impact of four factors on derailment behaviour in a collision: initial vertical height difference, lateral displacement, initial pitch angle, and initial yaw angle, across various speeds. This research offers significant insights into enhancing the safety measures against train collision derailments.
SimicGLucaninVMilkovicD. Elements of passive safety of railway vehicles in collision. Int J Crashworthiness2006; 11: 357–369.
2.
GuoZChenZZhangJ, et al.Characteristics of train–pedestrian collisions in southwest China, 2011–2020. Int J Environ Res Publ Health2022; 19: 6104.
3.
LlanaPStringfellowR. Preliminary development of locomotive crashworthy components. In Proceedings of the asme/asce/ieee joint rail conference. Amer Soc Mechanical Engineers, 2012, pp. 309–318.
4.
LlanaPStringfellowRMayvilleR. Finite element analysis and full-scale testing of locomotive crashworthy components. In Proceeding of the asme joint rail conference. Amer Soc Mechanical Engineers, 2013.
5.
LlanaP. Locomotive crash energy management test plans. In Proceedings of the asme joint rail conference. Amer Soc Mechanical Engineers, 2015, pp. V001T02A006.
6.
LlanaPJacobsenKTyrellD. Conventional locomotive coupling tests. In Proceedings of the asme international mechanical engineering congress and exposition. Amer Soc Mechanical Engineers, 2016, vol 12.
7.
LlanaPJacobsenKStringfellowR. Locomotive crash energy management coupling tests evaluation and vehicle-to-vehicle test preparation. Proceedings of the asme joint rail conference. Amer Soc Mechanical Engineers, 2019.
8.
TyrellDJacobsenKParentDPreparations for a train-to-train impact test of crash-energy management passenger rail equipment. In Proceedings of the 2005 ASME/IEEE Joint Rail Conference. IEEE, 2005, pp. 107–116.
9.
PrianteMTyrellDPerimanB. The influence of train type, car weight, and train length on passenger train crashworthiness. In Proceedings of the 2005 ASME/IEEE Joint Rail Conference. IEEE, 2005, pp. 89–96.
10.
TyrellDMartinezESeversonK, et al.Overview of a crash energy management specification for passenger rail equipment. In Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE/ASME Joint Rail Conference. IEEE, 2006, pp. 131–140.
11.
StrangJHynesRPeacockT, et al.Development of crash energy management specification for passenger rail equipment. Transp Res Rec2006; 2006: 76–83.
12.
ZhangJZhuTYangB, et al.Collision characteristics of the intermediate coupler of a rail vehicle. Veh Syst Dyn2023; 61: 3089–3110.
13.
ZhangJZhuTYangB, et al.Influence of wheelset rotational motion on train collision response and wheelset lift mechanism. Int J Real Ther2023; 11: 573–597.
14.
AmbrósioJCarvalhoMMilhoJ, et al.A validated railway vehicle interior layout with multibody dummies and finite element seats models for crash analysis. Multibody Syst Dyn2022; 54: 179–212.
15.
LiPLiZHanZ, et al.Running safety evaluation of high-speed train subject to the impact of floating ice collision on bridge piers. Proc Inst Mech Eng F J Rail Rapid Transit2022; 236: 220–233.
16.
XiaoXXuPYaoS, et al.Numerical investigation of the U-Steel guard rail used in train-to-train collision tests. Machines2022; 10: 666.
17.
YaoSZhuHLiuM, et al.A study on the frontal oblique collision-induced derailment mechanism in subway vehicles. Proc Inst Mech Eng F J Rail Rapid Transit2020; 234: 584–595.
18.
LuSWangPNiW, et al.Energy absorption design for crash energy management passenger trains based on scaled model. Struct Multidiscip Optim2021; 65: 2.
19.
AndradeFXCFeuchtMHaufeA, et al.An incremental stress state dependent damage model for ductile failure prediction. Int J Fract2016; 200: 127–150.
20.
WangJRakhaHA. Longitudinal train dynamics model for a rail transit simulation system. Transport Res C Emerg Technol2018; 86: 111–123.
21.
YuZMaoJ. A stochastic dynamic model of train-track-bridge coupled system based on probability density evolution method. Appl Math Model2018; 59: 205–232.
22.
WangZMeiGXiongQ, et al.Motor car–track spatial coupled dynamics model of a high-speed train with traction transmission systems. Mech Mach Theor2019; 137: 386–403.
23.
ZhaoHXuPLiB, et al.Full-scale train-to-train impact test and multi-body dynamic simulation analysis. Machines2021; 9: 297.
24.
LiDSongHMengG, et al.Dynamic characteristics of wheel–rail collision vibration for high-speed train under crosswind. Veh Syst Dyn2023; 61: 1997–2022.
25.
BruniSMeijaardJPRillG, et al.State-of-the-art and challenges of railway and road vehicle dynamics with multibody dynamics approaches. Multibody Syst Dyn2020; 49: 1–32.
26.
LaiZJiangLZhouW, et al.Lateral girder displacement effect on the safety and comfortability of the high-speed rail train operation. Veh Syst Dyn2022; 60: 3215–3239.
27.
ZhangTGuoXJinT, et al.Dynamic derailment behaviour of urban tram subjected to lateral collision. Int J Real Ther2022; 10: 581–605.
28.
YangC. Research on key issues of train collision dynamics. Southwest Jiaotong University, 2016.
29.
YangCXiaoSNZhuT. Time integration algorithm for nonlinear railroad vehicle systems. J Transport Eng2016; 16: 88–94.
30.
YangCXiaoSNYangGW. A class of non-dissipative explicit time integration methods. J Vib Eng2015; 28(03): 441–448.
31.
LiZChenZZhaiW. Nonlinear dynamic characteristics of a spur gear pair considering extended tooth contact and coupling effect between gear neighboring teeth. Nonlinear Dyn2023; 111: 2395–2414.
32.
XuSLiWLiL, et al.Crashworthiness design and multi-objective optimization for bio-inspired hierarchical thin-walled structures. Comput Model Eng Sci2022; 131: 929–947.
33.
OlivierBVerlindenOKouroussisG. Effect of applied force cosimulation schemes on recoupled vehicle/track problems. Multibody Syst Dyn2020; 50: 337–353.
34.
JinSZKimJ-SJungH-S. Study on 3-D simulation for overriding evaluation of urban train. Transactions of the KSME, A2015; 39: 1063–1068.
35.
DuncanIWebbP. The Longitudinal Behaviour of Heavy Haul Trains Using Remote Locomotives. The Fourth International Heavy Haul Railway Conference 1989: Railways in Action; Preprints of Papers. Australia: Institution of Engineers, 1989.
36.
YeYSunYDongfangS, et al.Optimizing wheel profiles and suspensions for railway vehicles operating on specific lines to reduce wheel wear: a case study. Multibody Syst Dyn2021; 51: 91–122.
37.
JiangPLingLDingX, et al.Flexible vibration of rail vehicle car-body induced by out-of-round wheels. Veh Syst Dyn2023; 61: 2825–2847.
38.
ZhangJZhuTYangB, et al.A rigid–flexible coupling finite element model of coupler for analyzing train instability behavior during collision. Railw Eng Sci2023; 31: 325–339.
39.
SanteliaMMazzeoFDi GialleonardoE, et al.A multibody non-linear model of the post-derailment dynamics of a railway vehicle. Veh Syst Dyn2023; 62: 1848–1875.
40.
LiuYYangBXiaoS, et al.Research on the influence of multiple parameters on the responses of a B-type subway train. Chin J Mech Eng2022; 35: 85.
41.
ZhaiW. Vehicle–track coupled dynamics: theory and applications. Springer, 2020.
42.
LuoRShiHL. System dynamics of railroad vehicles and applications. Southwest Jiaotong University Press, 2018.
43.
YangCXiaoSLuL, et al.Two dynamic explicit methods based on double time steps. Proc Inst Mech Eng - Part K J Multi-body Dyn2014; 228: 330–337.
44.
MagalhãesHMarquesFLiuB, et al.Implementation of a Non-Hertzian contact model for railway dynamic application. Multibody Syst Dyn2020; 48: 41–78.
45.
WangKW. Calculation of wheel contact point traces and wheel-rail contact geometric parameters. J Southwest Jiaot Univ1984; 18(1): 92–102.
46.
KnotheK. History of wheel/rail contact mechanics: from redtenbacher to kalker. Veh Syst Dyn2008; 46: 9–26.
47.
PolachO. A fast wheel-rail forces calculation computer code. Veh Syst Dyn1999; 33: 728–739.
48.
PolachO. Influence of locomotive tractive effort on the forces between wheel and rail. Veh Syst Dyn2001; 35: 7–22.
