Abstract
This article presents a qualitative comparison of the key characteristics and subsequent impact performance for articulated and non-articulated train types. The fundamental purpose of the article is through a review of articulated and non-articulated trains in terms of impact stability to identify and compare the areas referred to as ‘impact worthiness’ design.
The major differences between articulated and non-articulated trains are highlighted first. Then, the mechanical reasons leading to the differences and their consequences to impact performance are analysed from three viewpoints: coupling stiffness and freedom, support and coupling patterns, and carbody structural features. The analysis shows that the differences in bogie support positions on the carbody and the effects on coupling devices lead to differences in several structural and compositional characteristics, including height of gravity of the carbody, length of the vehicle, the composition of the end panel, stiffness of coupling device, number of support points to vehicle, and support height of the secondary suspension.
These characteristics result in different impact responses for the two types of train and are directly related to subsequent behaviour. Articulated trains show stiff connection and integral performance in collisions but with less capability for absorbing impact energy between vehicles, whereas non-articulated trains show flexible connection with more random behaviour in collisions but with greater options for energy absorber installation between vehicles.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.