Long-term rail profile damage in a railway crossing: Field measurements and numerical simulations

On the influence of crossing angle on long-term rail damage evolution in railway crossings

“…The different crossing angles are obtained by uniformly altering the spacing distance between the cross-sections. The virgin rail cross-sections are the nominal measured profiles previously presented in [6]. The smaller crossing angle corresponds to a larger spacing between the cross-sections: 50 mm between cross-sections for the 1:12 crossing angle, 61.5 mm for the 1:15 angle and 77.5 mm for the 1:18.5 angle.…”

“…The present study uses the multidisciplinary iterative methodology presented in [9]. Since the time of its original publication, the methodology has been improved in terms of computational efficiency and robustness (see [6,13]). The methodology predicts the rail damage at sampled cross-sections along the crossing rail.…”

“…It is assumed that the measured worn wheel profiles Figure 2. Illustration of iterative simulation methodology (adopted from [6]).…”

“…The methodology has been validated by comparing predicted rail profiles with those measured at Härad in Sweden [9] and Haste in Germany [20], and by comparing the distributions of predicted and measured damage at Zeltweg in Austria [6]. In particular, the Zeltweg study showed that the methodology is capable of accurate qualitative prediction of long-term plastic deformation and wear.…”

“…The advantages with this approach are a more accurate modelling of the wheel-rail contact [4] and the consideration of the non-proportional loading, which leads to additional material hardening [5]. However, due to high computational cost, it has been limited to studies of a single wheel profile rolling over the crossing, which can have a significant influence on the contact conditions [6] and the calculated distribution of damage. Additionally, very few studies adopting this approach have considered all three main damage mechanisms [7].…”